(NOTE: The electronic text obtained from The Electronic Bible Society was
not completely corrected. EWTN has corrected all discovered errors.)
Transliteration of Greek words: All phonetical except: w = omega; h serves
three puposes: 1. = Eta; 2. = rough breathing, when appearing initially
before a vowel; 3. = in the aspirated letters theta = th, phi = ph, chi =
ch. Accents are given immediately after their corresponding vowels: acute =
' , grave = `, circumflex = ^. The character ' doubles as an apostrophe,
when necessary.
ST. AUGUSTINE
IN ANSWER TO THE LETTERS OF PETILIAN (the Donatist, Bishop of Cirta.)
[Contra litteras Petiliani Donatistae Cortensis, Episcopi]
BOOKS I-II
[Translated by the Rev. J. R. King, M.A., Vicar of St. Peter's in the East,
Oxford; and late fellow and tutor of Merton College, Oxford; revised by the
Rev. Chester D. Hartranft, D.D., Professor of Biblical and Ecclesiastical
History in the Theological Seminary at Hartford, Connecticut.]
BOOK I.
WRITTEN IN THE FORM OF A LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE CATHOLICS, IN WHICH THE
FIRST PORTION OF THE LETTER WHICH PETILIAN HAD WRITTEN TO HIS ADHERENTS IS
EXAMINED AND REFUTED.
Augustin, to the well-beloved brethren that belong to the care of our
charge, greeting in the Lord:
CHAP. 1.--1. Ye know that we have often wished to bring forward into
open notoriety, and to confute, not so much from our own arguments as from
theirs, the sacrilegious error of the Donatist heretics; whence it came to
pass that we wrote letters even to some of their leaders,--not indeed for
purposes of communion with them, for of that they had already in times past
rendered themselves unworthy by dissenting from the Church; nor yet in
terms of reproach, but of a conciliatory character, with the view that,
having discussed the question with us which caused them to break off from
the holy communion of the whole world, they might, on consideration of the
truth, be willing to be corrected, and might not defend the headstrong
perversity of their predecessors with a yet more foolish obstinacy, but
might be reunited to the Catholic stock, so as to bring forth the fruits of
charity. But as it is written, "With those who have hated peace I am more
peaceful,"(1) so they rejected my letters, just as they hate the very name
of peace, in whose interests they were written. Now, however, as I was in
the church of Constantina, Absentius(2) being present, with my colleague
Fortunatus, his bishop, the brethren brought before my notice a letter,
which they said that a bishop of the said schism had addressed to his
presbyters, as was set forth in the superscription of the letter itself.
When I had read it, I was so amazed to find that in his very first words he
cut away the very roots of the whole claims of his party to communion, that
I was unwilling to believe that it could be the letter of a man who, if
fame speaks truly, is especially conspicuous among them for learning and
eloquence. But some of those who were present when I read it, being
acquainted with the polish and embellishment of his composition, gradually
persuaded me that it was undoubtedly his address. I thought, however, that
whoever the author might be, it required refutation, lest the writer should
seem to himself, in the company of the inexperienced, to have written
something of weight against the Catholic Church.
2. The first point, then, that he lays down in his letter is the
statement, "that we find fault with them for the repetition of baptism,
while we ourselves pollute our souls with a layer stained with guilt." But
to what profit is it that I should reproduce all his insulting terms? For,
since it is one thing to strengthen proofs, another thing to meddle with
abusive words by way of refutation, let us rather turn our attention to the
mode in which he has sought to prove that we do not possess baptism, and
that therefore they do not require the repetition of what was already
present, but confer what hitherto was wanting. For he says: "What we look
for is the conscience of the giver to cleanse that of the recipient." But
supposing the conscience of the giver is concealed from view, and perhaps
defiled with sin, how will it be able to cleanse the conscience of the
recipient, if, as he says, "what we look for is the conscience of the giver
to cleanse that of the recipient?" For if he should say that it makes no
matter to the recipient what amount of evil may lie concealed from view in
the conscience of the giver, perhaps that ignorance may have such a degree
of efficacy as this, that a man cannot be defiled by the guilt of the
conscience of him from whom he receives baptism, so long as he is unaware
of it. Let it then be granted that the guilty conscience of his neighbor
cannot defile a man so long as he is unaware of it, but is it therefore
clear that it can further cleanse him from his own guilt?
CHAP. 2.--3. Whence, then, is a man to be cleansed who receives
baptism, when the conscience of the giver is polluted without the knowledge
of him who is to receive it? Especially when he goes on to say, "For he who
receives faith from the faithless receives not faith, but guilt." There
stands before us one that is faithless ready to baptize, and he who should
be baptized is ignorant of his faithlessness: what think you that he will
receive? Faith, or guilt? If you answer faith, then you will grant that it
is possible that a man should receive not guilt, but faith, from him that
is faithless; and the former saying will be false, that "he who receives
faith from the faithless receives not faith, but guilt." For we find that
it is possible that a man should receive faith even from one that is
faithless, if he be not aware of the faithlessness of the giver. For he
does not say, He who receives faith from one that is openly and notoriously
faithless; but he says, "He who receives faith from the faithless receives
not faith, but guilt;" which certainly is false when a person is baptized
by one who hides his faithlessness. But if he shall say, Even when the
faithlessness of the baptizer is concealed, the recipient receives not
faith from him, but guilt, then let them rebaptize those who are well known
to have been baptized by men who in their own body have long concealed a
life of guilt, but have eventually been detected, convicted, and condemned.
CHAP. 3.--For, so long as they escaped detection, they could not bestow
faith on any whom they baptized, but only guilt, if it be true that
whosoever receives faith from one that is faithless receives not faith, but
guilt. Let them therefore be baptized by the good, that they may be enabled
to receive not guilt, but faith.
4. But how, again, shall they have any certainty about the good who are
to give them faith, if what we look to is the conscience of the giver,
which is unseen by the eyes of the proposed recipient? Therefore, according
to their judgment, the salvation of the spirit is made uncertain, so long
as in opposition to the holy Scriptures, which say, "It is better to trust
in the Lord than to put confidence in man,"(1) and, "Cursed be the man that
trusteth in man,"(2) they remove the hope of those who are to be baptized
from the Lord their God, and persuade them that it should be placed in man;
the practical result of which is, that their salvation becomes not merely
uncertain, but actually null and void. For "salvation belongeth unto the
Lord,"(3) and "vain is the help of man."(4) Therefore, whosoever places his
trust in man, even in one whom he knows to be just and innocent, is
accursed. Whence also the Apostle Paul finds fault with those who said they
were of Paul saying, "Was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in
the name of Paul?"(5)
CHAP. 4.--5. Wherefore, if they were in error, and would have perished
had they not been corrected, who wished to be of Paul, what must we suppose
to be the hope of those who wished to be of Donatus? For they use their
utmost endeavors to prove that the origin, root, and head of the baptized
person is none other than the individual by whom he is baptized. The result
is, that since it is very often a matter of uncertainty what kind of man
the baptizer is, the hope therefore of the baptized being of uncertain
origin, of uncertain root, of uncertain head, is of itself uncertain
altogether. And since it is possible that the conscience of the giver may
be in such a condition as to be accursed and defiled without the knowledge
of the recipient, it results that, being of an accursed origin, accursed
root, accursed head, the hope of the baptized may prove to be vain and
ungrounded. For Petilian expressly states in his epistle, that "everything
consists of an origin and root; and if it have not something for a head, it
is nothing." And since by the origin and root and head of the baptized
person he wishes to be understood the man by whom he is baptized, what good
does the unhappy recipient derive from the fact that he does not know how
bad a man his baptizer really is? For he does not know that he himself has
a bad head, or actually no head at all. And yet what hope can a man have,
who, whether he is aware of it or not, has either a very bad head or no
head at all? Can we maintain that his very ignorance forms a head, when his
baptizer is either a bad head or none at all? Surely any one who thinks
this is unmistakeably without a head.
CHAP. 5.--6. We ask, therefore, since he says, "He who receives faith
from the faithless receives not faith, but guilt," and immediately adds to
this the further statement, that "everything consists of an origin and
root; and if it have not something for a head, it is nothing;"--we ask, I
say, in a case where the faithlessness of the baptizer is undetected: If
then, the man whom he baptizes receives faith, and not guilt; if, then, the
baptizer is not his origin and root and head, who is it from whom he
receives faith? where is the origin from which he springs? where is the
root of which he is a shoot? where the head which is his starting-point?
Can it be, that when he who is baptized is unaware of the faithlessness of
his baptizer, it is then Christ who gives faith, it is then Christ who is
the origin and root and head? Alas for human rashness and conceit! Why do
you not allow that it is always Christ who gives faith, for the purpose of
making a man a Christian by giving it? Why do you not allow that Christ is
always the origin of the Christian, that the Christian always plants his
root in Christ, that Christ is the head of the Christian? Do we then
maintain that, even when spiritual grace is dispensed to those that believe
by the hands of a holy and faithful minister, it is still not the minister
himself who justifies, but that One of whom it is said, that "He justifieth
the ungodly?"(6) But unless we admit this, either the Apostle Paul was the
head and origin of those whom he had planted, or Apollos the root of those
whom he had watered, rather than He who had given them faith in believing;
whereas the same Paul says, "I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave
the increase: so then neither is he that planteth anything, nor he that
watereth, but God that giveth the increase.'(7) Nor was the apostle himself
their root, but rather He who says, "I am the vine, ye are the
branches."(8) How, too, could he be their head, when he says, that "we,
being many, are one body in Christ,"(9) and expressly declares in many
passages that Christ Himself is the head of the whole body?
CHAP. 6.--7. Wherefore, whether a man receive the sacrament of baptism
from a faithful or a faithless minister, his whole hope is in Christ, that
he fall not under the condemnation that "cursed is he that placeth his hope
in man." Otherwise, if each man is born again in spiritual grace of the
same sort as he by whom he is baptized, and if when he who baptizes him is
manifestly a good man, then he himself gives faith, he is himself the
origin and root and head of him who is being born; whilst, when the
baptizer is faithless without its being known, then the baptized person
receives faith from Christ, then he derives his origin from Christ, then he
is rooted in Christ, then he boasts in Christ as his head,--in that case
all who are baptized should wish that they might have faithless baptizers,
and be ignorant of their faithlessness: for however good their baptizers
might have been, Christ is certainly beyond comparison better still; and He
will then be the head of the baptized, if the faithlessness of the baptizer
shall escape detection.
CHAP. 7.--8. But if it is perfect madness to hold such a view (for it
is Christ always that justifieth the ungodly, by changing his ungodliness
into Christianity; it is from Christ always that faith is received, Christ
is always the origin of the regenerate and the head of the Church), what
weight, then, will those words have, which thoughtless readers value by
their sound, without inquiring what their inner meaning is? For the man who
does not content himself with hearing the words with his ear, but considers
the meaning of the phrase, when he hears, "What we look to is the
conscience of the giver, that it may cleanse the conscience of the
recipient," will answer, The conscience of man is often unknown to me, but
I am certain of the mercy of Christ: when he hears, "He who receives faith
from the faithless receives not faith, but guilt," will answer, Christ is
not faithless, from whom I receive not guilt, but faith: when he hears,
"Everything consists of an origin and root; and if it have not something
for a head, is nothing," will answer, My origin is Christ, my root is
Christ, my head is Christ. When he hears, "Nor does anything well receive
second birth, unless it be born again of good seed," he will answer, The
seed of which I am born again is the Word of God, which I am warned to hear
with attention, even though he through whom I hear it does not himself do
what he preaches; according to the words of the Lord, which make me herein
safe, "All whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not
ye after their works: for they say, and do not."(1) When he hears, "What
perversity must it be, that he who is guilty through his own sins should
make another free from guilt!" he will answer, No one makes me free from
guilt but He who died for our sins, and rose again for our justification.
For I believe, not in the minister by whose hands I am baptized, but in Him
who justifieth the ungodly, that my faith may be counted unto me for
righteousness.(2)
CHAP. 8.--9. When he hears, "Every good tree bringeth good fruit, but a
corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit: do men gather grapes of thorns?"(3)
and, "A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth good
things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil
things;"(4) he will answer, This therefore is good fruit, that I should be
a good tree, that is, a good man, that I should show forth good fruit, that
is, good works. But this will be given to me, not by him that planteth, nor
by him that watereth, but by God that giveth the increase. For if the good
tree be the good baptizer, so that his good fruit should be the man whom he
baptizes, then any one who has been baptized by a bad man, even if his
wickedness be not manifest, will have no power to be good, for he is sprung
from an evil tree. For a good tree is one thing; a tree whose quality is
concealed, but yet bad, is another. Or if, when the tree is bad, but hides
its badness, then whosoever is baptized by it is born not of it, but of
Christ; then they are justified with more perfect holiness who are baptized
by the bad who hide their evil nature, than they who are baptized by the
manifestly good.(5)
CHAP. 9.--10. Again, when he hears, "He that is washed by one dead, his
washing profiteth him nought,"(6) he will answer, "Christ, being raised
from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over Him:"(7) of
whom it is said, "The same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."(8)
But they are baptized by the dead, who are baptized in the temples of
idols. For even they themselves do not suppose that they receive the
sanctification which they look for from their priests, but from their gods;
and since these were men, and are dead in such sort as to be now neither
upon earth nor in the rest of heaven,(9) they are truly baptized by the
dead: and the same answer will hold good if there be any other way in which
these words of holy Scripture may be examined, and profitably discussed and
understood. For if in this place I understand a baptizer who is a sinner,
the same absurdity will follow, that whosoever has been baptized by an
ungodly man, even though his ungodliness be undiscovered, is yet washed in
vain, as though baptized by one dead. For he does not say, He that is
baptized by one manifestly dead, but absolutely, "by one dead." And if they
consider any man to be dead whom they know to be a sinner, but any one in
their communion to be alive, even though he manages most adroitly to
conceal a life of wickedness, in the first place with accursed pride they
claim more for themselves than they ascribe to God, that when a sinner is
unveiled to them he should be called dead, but when he is known by God he
is held to be alive. In the next place, if that sinner is to be called dead
who is known to be such by men, what answer will they make about Optatus,
whom they were afraid to condemn though they had long known his wickedness?
Why are those who were baptized by him not said to have been baptized by
one dead? Did he live because the Count was his faith?(1)--an elegant and
well-turned saying of some early colleagues of their own, which they
themselves are wont to quote with pride, not understanding that at the
death of the haughty Goliath it was his own sword by which his head was cut
off.(2)
CHAP. 10.--11. Lastly, if they are willing to give the name of dead
neither to the wicked man whose sin is hidden, nor to him whose sin is
manifest, but who has yet not been condemned by them, but only to him whose
sin is manifest and condemned, so that whosoever is baptized by him is
himself baptized by the dead, and his washing profits him nothing; what are
we to say of those whom their own party have condemned "by the
unimpeachable voice of a plenary Council,"(3) together with Maximianus and
the others who ordained him,--I mean Felicianus of Musti, and Praetextatus
of Assura, of whom I speak in the meantime, who are counted among the
twelve ordainers of Maximianus, as erecting an altar in opposition to their
altar at which Primianus stands? They surely are reckoned by them among the
dead. To this we have the express testimony of the noble decree of that
Council of theirs which formerly called forth shouts of unreserved(4)
applause when it was recited among them for the purpose of being decreed,
but which would now be received in silence if we should chance to recite it
in their ears; whereas they should rather have been slow at first to
rejoice in its, eloquence, test they should afterwards come to mourn over
it when its credit was destroyed. For in it they speak in the following
terms of the followers of Maximianus, who were shut out from their
communion: "Seeing that the shipwrecked members of certain men have been
dashed by the waves of truth upon the sharp rocks, and after the fashion of
the Egyptians, the shores are covered with the bodies of the dying; whose
punishment is intensified in death itself, since after their life has been
wrung from them by the avenging waters, they fail to find so much as
burial." In such gross terms indeed, do they insult those who were guilty
of schism from their body, that they call them dead and unburied; but
certainly they ought to have wished that they might obtain burial, if it
were only that they might not have seen Optatus Gildonianus advancing with
a military force, and like a sweeping wave that dashes beyond its fellows,
sucking back Felicianus and Praetextatus once again within their pale, out
of the multitude of bodies lying unburied on the shore.
CHAP. 11.--12. Of these I would ask, whether by coming to their sea
they were restored to life, or whether they are still dead there? For if
still they are none the less corpses, then the layer cannot in any way
profit those who are baptized by such dead men. But if they have been
restored to life, yet how can the layer profit those whom they baptized
before outside, while they were lying without life, if the passage, "He who
is baptized by the dead, of what profit is his baptism to him," is to be
understood in the way in which they think? For those whom Praetextatus and
Felicianus baptized while they were yet in communion with Maximianus are
now retained among them, sharing in their communion, without being again
baptized, together with the same men who baptized them--I mean Felicianus
and Praetextatus: taking occasion by which fact, if it were not that they
cherish the beginning of their own obstinacy, instead of considering the
certain end of their spiritual salvation, they would certainly be bound to
vigilance, and ought to recover the soundness of their senses, so as to
breathe again in Catholic peace; if only, laying aside the swelling of
their pride, and overcoming the madness of their stubbornness, they would
take heed and see what monstrous sacrilege it is to curse the baptism of
the foreign churches, which we have learned from the sacred books were
planted in primitive times, and to receive the baptism of the followers of
Maximianus, whom they nave condemned with their own lips.
CHAP. 12.--13. But our brethren themselves, the sons of the aforesaid
churches, were both ignorant at the time, and still are ignorant, of what
has been done so many years ago in Africa: wherefore they at any rate
cannot be defiled by the charges which have been brought, on the part of
the Donatists, against the Africans, without even knowing whether they were
true. But the Donatists having openly separated and divided themselves off,
although they are even said to have taken part in the ordination of
Primianus, yet condemned the said Primianus, ordained another bishop in
opposition to Primianus, baptized outside the communion of Primianus,
rebaptized after Primianus, and returned to Primianus with their disciples
who had been baptized by themselves outside, and never rebaptized by any
one inside. If such a union with the party of Maximianus does not pollute
the Donatists, how can the mere report concerning the Africans pollute the
foreigners? If the lips meet together without offense in the kiss of peace,
which reciprocally condemned each other, why is each man that is condemned
by them in the churches very far removed by the intervening sea from their
jurisdiction, not saluted with a kiss as a faithful Catholic, but driven
forth with a blast of indignation as an impious pagan? And if, in receiving
the followers of Maximianus, they made peace in behalf of their own unity,
far be it from us to find fault with them, save that they cut their own
throats by their decision, that whereas, to preserve unity in their schism,
they collect together again what had been parted from themselves, they yet
scorn to reunite their schism itself to the true unity of the Church.
CHAP. 13.--14. If, in the interests of the unity of the party of
Donatus, no one rebaptizes those who were baptized in a wicked schism, and
men, who are guilty of a crime of such enormity as to be compared by them
in their Council to those ancient authors of schism whom the earth
swallowed up alive,(1) are either unpunished after separation, or restored
again to their position after condemnation; why is it that, in defence of
the unity of Christ, which is spread throughout the whole inhabited world,
of which it has been predicted that it shall have dominion from sea to sea,
and from the river unto the ends of the, earth,(2)--a prediction which
seems from actual proof to be in process of fulfillment; why is it that, in
defence of this unity, they do not acknowledge the true and universal law
of that inheritance which rings forth from the books that are common to us
all: "I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the
uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession?"(3) In behalf of the unity
of Donatus, they are not compelled to call together again what they have
scattered abroad, but are warned to hear the cry of the Scriptures: why
will they not understand that they meet with such treatment through the
mercy of God, that since they brought false charges against the Catholic
Church, by contact as it were with which they were unwilling to defile
their own excessive sanctity, they should be compelled by the sovereign
authority of Optatus Gildonianus to receive again and associate with
themselves true offenses of the greatest enormity, condemned by the true
voice, as they say, of their own plenary Council? Let them at length
perceive how they are filled with the true crimes of their own party, after
inventing fictitious crimes wherewith to charge their brethren, when, even
if the charges had been true, they ought at length to feel how much should
be endured in the cause of peace, and in behalf of Christ's peace to return
to a Church which did not condemn crimes undiscovered, if on behalf of the
peace of Donatus they were ready to pardon such as were condemned.
CHAP. 14.--15. Therefore, brethren, let it suffice us that they should
be admonished and corrected on the one point of their conduct in the matter
of the followers of Maximianus. We do not ransack ancient archives, we do
not bring to light the contents of time honored libraries, we do not
publish our proofs to distant lands; but we bring in, as arbiters betwixt
us, all the proofs derived from our ancestors, we spread abroad the witness
that cries aloud throughout the world.
CHAP. 15.--16. Look at the states of Musti(4) and Assura:(5) there are
many still remaining in this life and in this province who have severed
themselves, and many from whom they have severed themselves; many who have
erected an altar, and many against whom that altar has been erected; many
who have condemned, and many who have been condemned; who have received,
and who have been received; who have been baptized outside, and not
baptized again within: if all these things in the cause of unity defile,
let the defiled hold their tongues; if these things in the cause of unity
do not defile, let them submit to correction, and terminate their strife.
CHAP. 16.--17. As for the words which follow in his letter, the writer
himself could scarcely fail to laugh at them, when, having made an
unlearned and lying use of the proof in which he quotes the words of
Scripture, "He who is washed by the dead, what profiteth him his washing?"
he endeavors to show to us "how far a traditor being still in life may be
accounted dead." And then he goes on further to say: "That man is dead who
has not been worthy to be born again in true baptism; he is likewise dead
who, although born in genuine baptism, has joined himself to a traditor."
If, therefore, the followers of Maximianus are not dead, why do the
Donatists say, in their plenary Council, that "the shores are covered with
their dying bodies?" But if they are dead, whence is there life in the
baptism which they gave? Again, if Maximianus is not dead, why is a man
baptized again who had been baptized by him? But if he is dead why is not
also Felicianus of Musti dead with him, who ordained him, and might have
died beyond the sea with some African colleague or another who was a
traditor? Or, if he also is himself dead, how is there life with him in
your society in those who, having been baptized outside by him who is dead,
have never been baptized again within?
CHAP, 17.--18. Then he further adds: "Both are without the life of
baptism, both he who never had it at all, and he who had it but has lost
it." He therefore never had it, whom Felicianus, the follower of Maximianus
or Praetextatus, baptized outside; and these men themselves have lost what
once they had When, therefore, these were received with their followers,
who gave to those whom they baptized what previously they did not have? and
who restored to themselves what they, had lost? But they took away with
them the form of baptism, but lost the veritable excellence of baptism by
their wicked schism. Why do you repudiate the form itself, which is holy at
all times and all places, in the Catholics whom you have not heard, whilst
you are willing to acknowledge it in the followers of Maximianus whom you
have punished?
19. But whatever he seemed to himself to say by way of accusation about
the traitor Judas, I see not how it can concern us, who are not proved by
them to have betrayed our trust; nor, indeed, if such treason were proved
on the part of any who before our time have died in our communion, would
that treason in any way defile us by whom it was disavowed, and to whom it
was displeasing. For if they themselves are not defiled by offenses
condemned by themselves, and afterwards condoned, how much less can we be
defiled by what we have disavowed so soon as we have heard of them! However
weighty, therefore, his invective against traditors, let him be assured
that they are condemned by me in precisely the same terms. But yet I make a
distinction; for he accuses one on my side who has long been dead without
having been condemned in any investigation made by me. I point to a man
adhering closely to his side, who had been condemned by him, or at least
had been separated by a sacrilegious schism, and whom he received again
with undiminished honor.
CHAP. 18.--20. He says: "You who are a most abandoned traditor have
come out in the character of a persecutor and murderer of us who keep the
law." If the followers of Maximianus kept the law when they separated from
you, then we may acknowledge you as a keeper of the law, when you are
separated from the Church spread abroad throughout the world. But if you
raise the question of persecutions, I at once reply: If you have suffered
anything unjustly, this does not concern those who, though they disapprove
of men who act in such a way,(1) yet endure them for the peace that is in
unity, in a manner deserving of all praise. Wherefore you have nothing to
bring up against the Lord's wheat, who endure the chaff that is among them
till the last winnowing, from whom you never would have separated yourself,
had you not shown yourself lighter than chaff by flying away under the
blast of temptation before the coming of the Winnower. But not to leave
this one example, which the Lord hath thrust back in their teeth, to close
the mouths of these men, for their correction if they will show themselves
to be wise, but for their confusion if they remain in their folly: if those
are more just that suffer persecution than those who inflict it, then those
same followers of Maximianus are the more just, whose basilica was utterly
overthrown, and who were grievously maltreated by the military following of
Optatus, when the mandates of the proconsul, ordering that all of them
should be shut out of the basilicas, were manifestly procured by the
followers of Primianus. Wherefore, if, when the emperors hated their
communion, they ventured on such violent measures for the persecution of
the followers of Maximianus, what would they do if they were enabled to
work their will by being in communion with kings? And if they did such
things as I have mentioned for the correction of the wicked, why are they
surprised that Catholic emperors should decree with greater power that they
should be worked upon and corrected who endeavor to rebaptize the whole
Christian world, when they have no ground for differing from them? seeing
that they, themselves bear witness that it is right to bear with wicked men
even where they have true charges to bring against them in the cause of
peace, since they received those whom they had themselves condemned,
acknowledging the honors conferred among themselves, and the baptism
administered in schism. Let them at length consider what treatment they
deserve at the hands of the Christian powers of the world, who are the
enemies of Christian unity throughout the world. If, therefore, correction
be bitter, yet let them not fail to be ashamed; lest when they begin to
read what they themselves have written, they be overcome with laughter,
when they do not find in themselves what they wish to find in others, and
fail to recognize(1) in their own case what they find fault with in their
neighbors.
CHAP. 19.--21. What, then, does he mean by quoting in his letter the
words with which our Lord addressed the Jews: "Wherefore, behold, I send
unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some of them ye shall
kill and crucify, and some of them shall ye scourge?"(2) For if by the wise
men and the scribes and the prophets they would have themselves be
understood, while we were as it were the persecutors of the prophets and
wise men, why are they unwilling to speak with us, seeing they are sent to
us? For, indeed, if the man who wrote that epistle which we are at this
present moment answering, were to be pressed by us to acknowledge it as his
own, stamping its authenticity with his signature, I question much whether
he would do it, so thoroughly afraid are they of our possessing any words
of theirs. For when we were anxious by some means or other to procure the
latter part of this same letter, because those from whom we obtained it
were unable to describe the whole of it, no one who was asked for it was
willing to give it to us, so soon as they knew that we were making a reply
to the portion which we had. Therefore, when they read how the Lord says to
the prophet, "Cry aloud, spare not, and write their sins with my pen,"(3)
these men who are sent to us as prophets have no fears on this score, but
take every precaution that their crying may not be heard by us: which they
certainly would not fear if what they spoke of us were true. But their
apprehension is not groundless, as it is written in the Psalm, "The mouth
of them that speak lies shall be stopped."(4) For if the reason that they
do not receive our baptism be that we are a generation of vipers--to use
the expression in his epistle--why did they receive the baptism of the
followers of Maximianus, of whom their Council speaks in the following
terms: "Because the enfolding of a poisoned womb has long concealed the
baneful offspring of a viper's seed, and the moist concretions of
[conceived iniquity have by slow heat flowed forth into the members of
serpents"? Is it hot therefore of themselves also that it is said in the
same Council, "The poison of asps is under their lips, their mouth is full
of cursing and bitterness, their feet are swift to shed blood; destruction
and unhappiness is in their ways, and the way of peace have they not
known"?(5) And yet they now hold these men themselves in undiminished
honor, and receive within their body those whom these men had baptized
without.
CHAP. 20.--22. Wherefore all this about the generation of vipers, and
the poison of asps under their lips, and all the other things which they
have said against those which have not known the way of peace, are really,
if they would but speak the truth, more strictly applicable to themselves,
since for the sake of the peace of Donatus they received the baptism of
these men, in respect of which they used the expressions quoted above in
the wording of the decree of the Council; but the baptism of the Church of
Christ dispersed throughout the world, from which peace itself came into
Africa, they repudiate, to the sacrilegious wounding of the peace of
Christ. Which, therefore, are rather the false prophets, who come in
sheep's clothing, while inwardly they are ravening wolves,(6)--they who
either fail to detect the wicked in the Catholic Church, and communicate
with them in all innocence, or else for the sake of the peace of unity are
bearing with those whom they cannot separate from the threshing-floor of
the Lord before the Winnower shall come, or they who do in schism what they
censure in the Catholic Church, and receive in their own separation, when
manifest to all and condemned by their own voice, what they profess that
they shun in the unity of the Church when it calls for toleration, and does
not even certainly exist?
CHAP. 21.--23. Lastly, it has been said, as he himself has also quoted,
"Ye shall know them by their fruits:"(1) let us therefore examine into
their fruits. You bring up against our predecessors their delivery of the
sacred books. This very charge we urge with greater probability against
their accusers themselves. And not to carry our search too far, in the same
city of Constantina your predecessors ordained Silvanus bishop at the very
outset of his schism. He, while he was still a subdeacon, was most
unmistakeably entered as a traditor in the archives of the city.(2) If you
on your side bring forward documents against our predecessors, all that we
ask is equal terms, that we should either believe both to be true or both
to be false. If both are true, you are unquestionably guilty of schism, who
have pretended that you avoid offenses in the communion of the whole world,
which you had commonly among you in the small fragment of your own sect.
But again, if both are false, you are unquestionably guilty of schism, who,
on account of the false charges of giving up the sacred books, are staining
yourselves with the heinous offence of severance from the Church. But if we
have something to urge in accusation while you have nothing, or if our
charges are true whilst yours are false, it is no longer matter of
discussion how thoroughly your mouths are closed.
CHAP. 22.--24. What if the holy and true Church of Christ were to
convince and overcome you, even if we held no documents in support of our
cause, or only such as were false, while you had possession of some genuine
proofs of delivery of the sacred books? what would then remain for you,
except that, if you would, you should show your love of peace, or otherwise
should hold your tongues?(3) For whatever, in that case, you might bring
forward in evidence, I should be able to say with the greatest ease and the
most perfect truth, that then you are bound to prove as much to the full
and catholic unity of the Church already spread abroad and established
throughout so many nations, to the end that you should remain within, and
that those whom you convict should be expelled. And if you have endeavored
to do this, certainly you have not been able to make good your proof; and
being vanquished or enraged, you have separated yourselves, with all the
heinous guilt of sacrilege, from the guiltless men who could not condemn on
insufficient proof. But if you have not even endeavored to do this, then
with most accursed and unnatural blindness you have cut yourselves off from
the wheat of Christ, which grows throughout His whole fields, that is,
throughout the whole world, until the end, because you have taken offense
at a few tares in Africa.
CHAP. 23.--25. In conclusion, the Testament is said to have been given
to the flames by certain men in the time of persecution. Now let its
lessons be read, from whatever source it has been brought to light.
Certainly in the beginning of the promises of the Testator this is found to
have been said to Abraham: "In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth
be blessed;"(4) and this saying is truthfully interpreted by the apostle:
"To thy seed," he says, "which is Christ."(5) No betrayal on the part of
any man has made the promises of God of none effect. Hold communion with
all the nations of the earth, and then you may boast that you have
preserved the Testament from the destruction of the flames. But if you will
not do so, which party is the rather to be believed to have insisted on the
burning of the Testament, save that which will not assent to its teaching
when it is brought to light? For how much more certainly, without any
sacrilegious rashness, can he be held to have joined the company of
traditors who now persecutes with his tongue the Testament which they are
said to have persecuted with the flames! You charge us with the
persecution: the true wheat of the Lord answers you, "Either it was done
justly, or it was done by the chaff that was among us." What have you to
say to this? You object that we have no baptism: the same true wheat of the
Lord answers you, that the form of the sacrament even within the Church
fails to profit some, as it did no good to Simon Magus when he was
baptized, much more it fails to profit those who are without. Yet that
baptism remains in them when they depart, is proved from this, that it is
not restored to them when they return. Never, therefore, except by the
greatest shamelessness, will you be able to cry out against that wheat, or
to call them false prophets clad in sheep's clothing, whilst inwardly they
are ravening wolves; since either they do not know the wicked in the unity
of the Catholic Church, or for the sake of unity bear with those whom they
know.
CHAP. 24.--26. But let us turn to the consideration of your fruits. I
pass over the tyrannous exercise of authority in the cities, and especially
in the estates of other men; I pass over the madness of the
Circumcelliones, and the sacrilegious and profane adoration of the bodies
of those who had thrown themselves of their own accord over precipices, the
revellings of drunkenness, and the ten years' groaning of the whole of
Africa under the cruelty of the one man Optatus Gildonanius: all this I
pass over, because there are certain among you who cry out that these
things are, and have ever been displeasing to them. But they say that they
bore with them in the cause of peace, because they could not put them down;
wherein they condemn themselves by their own judgment: for if indeed they
felt such love for peace, they never would have rent in twain the bond of
unity. For what madness can be greater, than to be willing to abandon peace
in the midst of peace itself, and to be anxious to retain it in the midst
of discord? Therefore, for the sake of those who pretend that they do not
see the evils of this same faction of Donatus, which all men see and blame,
ignoring them even to the extent of saying of Optatus himself, "What did he
do?" "Who accused him?" "Who convicted him?" "I know nothing," "I saw
nothings" "I heard nothing,"--for the sake of these, I say, who pretend
that they are ignorant of what is generally notorious, the party of
Maximianus has arisen, through whom their eyes are opened, and their mouths
are closed: for they openly sever themselves; they openly erect altar
against altar; they are openly in a Council(1) called sacrilegious and
vipers, and swift to shed blood, to be compared with Dathan and Abiram and
Korah, and are condemned in cutting terms of abhorrence; and are as openly
received again with undiminished honors in company with those whom they
have baptized. Such are the fruits of these men, who do all this for the
peace of Donatus, that they may clothe themselves in sheep's clothing, and
reject the peace of Christ throughout the world that they may be ravening
wolves within the fold.
CHAP. 25.--27. I think that I have left unanswered none of the
statements in the letter of Donatus, so far at least as relates to what I
have been able to find in that part of which we are in possession. I should
be glad if they would produce the other part as well, in case there should
be anything in it which does not admit of refutation. But as for these
answers which we have made to him, with the help of God, I admonish your
Christian love, that ye not only communicate them to those who seek for
them, but also force them on those who show no longing for them. Let them
answer anything they will; and if they shrink from sending a reply to us,
let them at any rate send letters to their own party, only not forbidding
that the contents should be shown to us. For if they do this, they show
their fruits most openly, by which they are proved to demonstration to be
ravening wolves disguised in sheep's clothing, in that they secretly lay
snares for our sheep, and openly shrink from giving any answer to the
shepherds. We only lay to their charge the sin of schism, in which they are
all most thoroughly involved,--not the offenses of certain of their party,
which some of them declare to be displeasing to themselves. If they, on the
other hand, abstain from charging us with the sins of other men, they have
nothing they can lay to our charge, and therefore they are wholly unable to
defend themselves from the charge of schism; because it is by a wicked
severance that they have separated themselves from the threshing-floor of
the Lord, and from the innocent company of the corn that is growing
throughout the world, on account of charges which either are false, and
invented by themselves, or even if true, involve the chaff alone.
CHAP 26.--28. But it is possible that you may expect of me that I
should go on to refute what he has introduced about Manichaeus. Now, in
respect of this, the only thing that offends me is that he has censured a
most pestilent and pernicious error--I mean the heresy of the Manichaeans--
in terms of wholly inadequate severity, if indeed they amount to censure at
all, though the Catholic Church has broken down his defenses by the
strongest evidence of truth.(2) For the inheritance of Christ, established
in all nations, is secure against heresies which have been shut out from
the inheritance; but, as the Lord says, "How can Satan cast out Satan?"(3)
so how can the error of the Donatists have power to overthrow the error of
the Manichaeans?(4)
CHAP. 27.--29. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, though that error is
exposed and overcome in many ways, and dare not oppose the truth on any
show of reason whatsoever, but only with the unblushing obstinacy of
impudence; yet, not to load your memory with a multitude of proofs, I would
have you bear in mind this one action of the followers of Maximianus,
confront them with this one fact, thrust this in their teeth, to make them
their treacherous tongues, destroy their calumny with this, as it were a
three-pronged dart destroying a three-headed monster. They charge us with
betrayal of the sacred books; they charge us with persecution; they charge
us with false baptism: to all their charges make the same answer about the
followers of Maximianus. For they think that the proofs are lost which show
that their predecessors gave the sacred volumes to the flames; but this at
least they cannot hide, that they have received with unimpaired honors
those who were stained with the sacrilege of schism. Also they think that
those most violent persecutions are hidden, which they direct against any
who oppose them whenever they are able; but whilst spiritual persecution
surpasses bodily persecution, they received with undiminished honors the
followers of Maximianus, whom they themselves persecuted in the body, and
of whom they themselves said, "Their feet are swift to shed blood;"(1) and
this at any rate they cannot hide.
CHAP. 28. Finally, they think that the question of baptism is hidden,
with which they deceive wretched souls. But whilst they say that none have
baptism who were baptized outside the communion of the one Church, they
received with undiminished honors the followers of Maximianus, with those
whom they baptized in schism outside the Donatist communion, and this at
least they cannot hide.
30. "But these things," they say, "bring no pollution in the cause of
peace; and it is well to bend to mercy the rigor of extreme severity, that
broken branches may be grafted in anew." Accordingly, in this way the whole
question is settled, by defeat in them, by the impossibility of defeat for
us; for if the name of peace be assumed for even the faintest shadow of
defense to justify the bearing with wicked men in schism, then beyond all
doubt the violation of true peace itself involves detestable guilt, with
nothing to be said in its defence throughout the unity of the world.
CHAP. 29.--31. These things, brethren, I would have you retain as the
basis of your action and preaching with untiring gentleness: love men,
while you destroy errors; take of the truth without pride; strive for the
truth without cruelty. Pray for those whom you refute and convince of
error. For the prophet prays to God for mercy upon such as these, saying,
"Fill their faces with shame, that they may seek Thy name, O Lord."(2) And
this, indeed, the Lord has done already, so as to fill the faces of the
followers of Maximianus with shame in the sight of all mankind: it only
remains that they should learn how to blush to their soul's health. For so
they will be able to seek the name of the Lord, from which they are turned
away to their utter destruction, whilst they exalt their own name in the
place of that of Christ. May ye live and persevere in Christ, and be
multiplied, and abound in the love of God, and in love towards one another,
and towards all men, brethren well beloved.
BOOK II.(1)
IN WHICH AUGUSTIN REPLIES TO ALL THE SEVERAL STATEMENTS IN THE LETTER OF
PETILIANUS, AS THOUGH DISPUTING WITH AN ADVERSARY FACE TO FACE,
CHAP. 1.--1. That we made a full and sufficient answer to the first
part of the letter of Petilianus, which was all that we had been able to
find, will be remembered by all who were able to read or hear what we
replied. But since the whole of it was afterwards found and copied by our
brethren, and sent to us with the view that we should answer it as a whole,
this task was one which our pen could not escape,--not that he says
anything new in it, to which answer has not been already made in many ways
and at various times; but still, on account of the brethren of slower
comprehension, who, when they read a matter in any place, cannot always
refer to everything that has been said upon the same subject, I will comply
with those who urge me by all means to reply to every point, and that as
though we were carrying on the discussion face to face in the form of a
dialogue. I will set down the words of his epistle under his name, and I
will give the answer under my own name, as though it had all been taken
down by reporters while we were debating. And so there will be no one who
can complain either that I have passed anything over, or that they have
been unable to understand it for want of distinction between the parties to
the discussion; at the same time that the Donatists themselves, who are
unwilling to argue the question in our presence, as is shown by the letters
which they have circulated among their party, may thus not fail to find the
truth answering them point by point, just as though they were discussing
the matter with us face to face.
2. In the very beginning of the letter PETILIANUS said: "Petilianus, a
bishop, to his well-beloved brethren, fellow-priests, and deacons,
appointed ministers with us throughout our diocese in the gospel, grace be
to you and peace, from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ."
3. AUGUSTIN answered: I acknowledge the apostolic greeting. You see who
you are that employ it, but see from what source you have learned what you
say. For in these terms Paul salutes the Romans, and in the same terms the
Corinthians, the Galatians, the Ephesians, the Colossians, the Philippians,
the Thessalonians. What madness is it, therefore, to be unwilling to share
the salvation of peace with those very Churches in whose epistles you
learned its form of salutation?
CHAP. 2.--4. PETILIANUS said: "Those who have polluted their souls with
a guilty laver, under the name of baptism, reproach us with baptizing
twice,--than whose obscenity, indeed, any kind of filth is more cleanly,
seeing that through a perversion of cleanliness they have come to be made
fouler by their washing."
5. AUGUSTIN answered: We are neither made fouler by our washing, nor
cleaner by yours. But when the water of baptism is given to any one in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, it is neither
ours nor yours, but His of whom it was said to John, "Upon whom thou shalt
see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, the same is He which
baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."(2)
CHAP. 3.--6. PETILIANUS said: "For what we look to is the conscience of
the giver, to cleanse that of the recipient."
7. AUGUSTIN answered: We therefore need have no anxiety about the
conscience of Christ, But if you assert any man to be the giver, be he who
he may, there will be no certainty about the cleansing of the recipient,
because there is no certainty about the conscience of the giver.
CHAP. 4.--8. PETILIANUS said: "For he who receives faith from the
faithless, receives not faith but guilt."
9. AUGUSTIN answered: Christ is not faithless, from whom the faithful
man receives not guilt but faith. For he believeth on Him that justifieth
the ungodly, that his faith may be counted for righteousness.(1)
CHAP.5.--10. PETILIANUS said: "For everything consists of an origin and
root; and if it have not something for a head, it is nothing: nor does
anything well receive second birth, unless it be born again of good seed."
11. AUGUSTIN answered: Why will you put yourself forward in the room of
Christ, when you will not place yourself under Him? He is the origin, and
root, and head of him who is being born, and in Him we feel no fear, as we
must in any man, whoever he may be, lest he should prove to be false and of
abandoned character, and we should be found to be sprung from an abandoned
source, growing from an abandoned root, united to an abandoned head. For
what man can feel secure about a man, when it is written, "Cursed be the
man that trusteth in man?" But the seed of which we are born again is the
word of God, that is, the gospel. Whence the apostle says, "For in Christ
Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."(3) And yet he allows even
those to preach the gospel who were preaching it not in purity, and
rejoices in their preaching;(4) because, although they were preaching it
not in purity, but seeking their own, not the things which are Jesus
Christ's,(5) yet the gospel which they preached was pure. And the Lord had
said of certain of like character, "Whatsoever they bid you observe, that
observe and do; but do not yet after their works: for they say, and do not.
If, therefore, what is in itself pure is preached in purity, then the
preacher himself also, in that he is a partner with the word, has his share
in begetting the believer; but if he himself be not regenerate, and yet
what he preaches be pure, then the believer is born not from the barrenness
of the minister but from the fruitfulness of the word.
CHAP. 6.--12. PETILIANUS said: "This being the case, brethren, what
perversity must it be, that he who is guilty through his own sins should
make another free from guilt, when the Lord Jesus Christ says, 'Every good
tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil
fruit: do men gather grapes of thorns?'(7) And again: 'A good man, out of
the good treasure of the heart, bringeth forth good things: and an evil
man, out of the evil treasure, bringeth forth evil things.'"(8)
13. AUGUSTIN answered: No man, even though he be not guilty through his
own sins, can make his neighbor free from sin, because he is not God.
Otherwise, if we were to expect that out of the innocence of the baptizer
should be produced the innocence of the baptized, then each will be the
more innocent in proportion as he may have found a more innocent person by
whom to be baptized; and will himself be the less innocent in proportion as
he by whom he is baptized is less innocent. And if the man who baptizes
happens to entertain hatred against another man, this will also be imputed
to him who is baptized. Why, therefore, does the wretched man hasten to be
baptized,--that his own sins may be forgiven him, or that those of others
may be reckoned against him? Is he like a merchant ship, to discharge one
burden, and to take on him another? But by the good tree and its good
fruit, and the corrupt tree and its evil fruit, we are wont to understand
men and their works, as is consequently shown in those other words which
you also quoted: "A good man, out of the good treasure of his heart,
bringeth forth good things: and an evil man, out of the evil treasure,
bringeth forth evil things." But when a man preaches the word of God, or
administers the sacraments of God, he does not, if he is a bad man, preach
or minister out of his own treasure; but he will be counted among those of
whom it is said, "Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but
do not ye after their works:" for they bid you observe what is God's, but
their works are their own. For if it is as you say, that is, if the fruit
of those who baptize consist in the baptized persons themselves, you
declare a great woe against Africa, if a young Optatus has sprung up for
every one that Optatus baptized.
CHAP. 7.--4. PETILIANUS said: "And again, 'He who is baptized by one
that is dead, his washing profiteth him nothing.'(9) He did not mean that
the baptizer was a corpse, a lifeless body, the remains of a man ready for
burial, but one lacking the Spirit of God, who is compared to a dead body,
as He declares to a disciple in another place, according to the witness of
the gospel. For His disciple says, 'Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my
father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me, and let the dead bury their
dead.'(1) The father of the disciple was not baptized. He declared him as a
pagan to belong to the company of pagans; unless he said this of the
unbelieving, The dead cannot bury the dead. He was dead, therefore, not as
smitten by some death, but as smitten even during life. For he who so lives
as to be doomed to eternal death is tortured by a death in life. To be
baptized, therefore, by the dead, is to have received not life but death.
We must therefore consider and declare how far the traditor is to be
accounted dead while yet alive. He is dead who has not deserved to be born
again with a true baptism; he is ikewise dead who, having been born again
with a true baptism, has become involved with a traditor. Both are wanting
in the life of baptism,--both he who never had it at all, and he who had it
and has lost it. For the Lord Jesus Christ says, 'There shall come to that
man seven spirits more wicked than the former one, and the last state of
that man shall be worse than the first.'"(2)
15. AUGUSTIN answered: Seek with greater care to know in what sense the
words which you have quoted from Scripture in proof of your position were
really uttered, and how they should be understood. For that all unrighteous
persons are wont to be called dead in a mystical sense is clear enough; but
Christ, to whom true baptism belongs, which you say is false because of the
faults of men, is alive, sitting at the right hand of the Father, and He
will not die any more through any infirmity of the flesh: death will no
more have dominion over Him.(3) And they who are baptized with His baptism
are not baptized by one who is dead. And if it so happen that certain
ministers, being deceitful workers, seeking their own, not the things which
are Jesus Christ's, proclaiming the gospel not in purity, and preaching
Christ of contention and envy, are to be called dead because of their
unrighteousness, yet the sacrament of the living God does not die even in
one that is dead. For that Simon was dead who was baptized by Philip in
Samaria, who wished to purchase the gift of God for money; but the baptism
which he had lived in him still to work his punishment.
16. But how false the statement is which you make, that "both are
wanting in the life of baptism, both he who never had it at all, and he who
had it and has lost it," you may see from this, that in the case of those
who apostatize after having been baptized, and who return through
penitence, baptism is not restored to them, as it would be restored if it
were lost. In what manner, indeed, do your dead men baptize according to
your interpretation? Must we not reckon the drunken among the dead (to say
nothing of the rest, and to mention only what is well known and of daily
experience among all), seeing that the apostle says of the widow, "But she
that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth?"(5) In the next place, in
that Council of yours, in which you condemned Maximianus with his advisers
or his ministers, have you forgotten with what eloquence you said, "Even
after the manner of the Egyptians, the shores are full of the bodies of the
dying, on whom the weightier punishment falls in death itself, in that,
after their life has been wrung from them by the avenging waters, they have
not found so much as burial?" And yet you yourselves may see whether or no
one of them, Felicianus, has been brought to life again; yet he has with
him within the communion of your body those whom he baptized outside. As
therefore he is baptized by One that is alive, who is clothed with the
baptism of the living Christ, so he is baptized by the dead who is wrapped
in the baptism of the dead Saturn, or any one like him; that we may set
forth in the meanwhile, with what brevity we may, in what sense the words
which you have quoted may be understood without any cavilling on the part
of any one of us. For, in the sense in which they are received by you, you
make no effort to explain them, but only strive to entangle us together
with yourselves.
CHAP. 8.--17. PETILIANUS said: "We must consider, I say, and declare
how far the treacherous traditor is to be accounted dead while yet in life.
Judas was an apostle when he betrayed Christ; and the same man was already
dead, having spiritually lost the office of an apostle, being destined
afterwards to die by hanging himself, as it is written: 'I have sinned,'
says he, 'in that I have betrayed the innocent blood; and he departed, and
went and hanged himself.'(6) The traitor perished by the rope: he left the
rope for others like himself, of whom the Lord Christ cried aloud to the
Father, 'Father, those that Thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is
lost, but the son of perdition; that the Scripture might be fulfilled.'(7)
For David of old had passed this sentence on him who was to betray Christ
to the unbelievers: 'Let another take his office. Let his children be
fatherless, and his wife a widow.'(1) See how mighty is the spirit of the
prophets, that it was able to see all future things as though they were
present, so that a traitor who was to be born hereafter should be condemned
many centuries before. Finally, that the said sentence should be completed,
the holy Matthias received the bishopric of that lost apostle. Let no one
be so dull, no one so faithless, as to dispute this: Matthias won for
himself a victory, not a wrong, in that he carried off the spoils of the
traitor from the victory of the Lord Christ. Why then, after this, do you
claim to yourself a bishopric as the heir of a worse traitor? Judas
betrayed Christ in the flesh to the unbelievers; you in the spirit madly
betrayed the holy gospel to the flames of sacrilege. Judas betrayed the
Lawgiver to the unbelievers; you, as it were, betraying all that he had
left, gave up the law of God to be destroyed by men. Whilst, had you loved
the law, like the youthful Maccabees, you would have welcomed death for the
sake of the laws of God (if indeed that can be said to be death to men
which makes them immortal because they died for the Lord); for of those
brethren we learn that one replied to the sacrilegious tyrant with these
words of faith 'Thou like a fury takest us out of this present life; but
the King of the world (who reigns for ever, and of His kingdom there shall
be no end) shall raise us up who have died for His laws, unto everlasting
life.'(2) If you were to burn with fire the testament of a dead man, would
you not be punished as the falsifier of a will? What therefore is likely to
become of you who have burned the most holy law of our God and Judge? Judas
repented of his deed even in death; you not only do not repent, but stand
forth as a persecutor and butcher of us who keep the law, whilst you are
the most wicked of traditors."
18. AUGUSTIN answered: See what a difference there is between your
calumnious words and our truthful assertions. Listen for a little while.
See how you have exaggerated the sin of delivering up the sacred books,
comparing us in most odious terms, like some sophistical inventor of
charges, with the traitor Judas. But when I shall have answered you on this
point with the utmost brevity,--I did not do what you assert; I did not
deliver up the sacred books; your charge is false; you will never be able
to prove it,--will not all that smoke of mighty words presently vanish
away? Or will you perchance endeavor to prove the truth of what you say?
This, then, you should do first; and then you might rise against us, as
against men who were already convicted, with whatever mass of invective you
might choose. Here is one absurdity: behold again a second.
19. You yourself, when speaking of the foretelling of the condemnation
of Judas, used these expressions: "See how mighty is the spirit of the
prophets, that it was able to see all future things as though they were
present, so that a traitor who was to be born hereafter should be condemned
many centuries before;" and yet you did not see that in the same sure
prophecy, and certain and unshaken truth, in which it was foretold that one
of the disciples should hereafter betray the Christ; it was also foretold
that the whole world should hereafter believe in Christ. Why did you pay
attention in the prophecy to the man who betrayed Christ, and in the same
place give no heed to the world for which Christ was betrayed? Who betrayed
Christ? Judas. To whom did he betray Him? To the Jews. What did the Jews do
to Him? "They pierced my hands and my feet," says the Psalmist. "I may tell
all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments among
them, and cast tots upon my vesture."(3) Of what importance, then, that is
which is bought at such a price, I would have you read a little later in
the psalm itself: "All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto
the Lord; and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before Thee.
For the kingdom is the Lord's; and He is the governor among the
nations."(4) But who is able to suffice for the quotation of all the other
innumerable prophetic passages which bear witness to the world that is
destined to believe? Yet you quote a prophecy because you see in it the man
who sold Christ: you do not see in it the possession which Christ bought by
being sold. Here is the second absurdity: behold again the third.
20. Among the many other expressions in your invective, you said: "If
you were to burn with fire the testament of a dead man, would you not be
punished as the falsifier of a will? What therefore is likely to become of
you who have burned the most holy law of our God and Judge?" In these words
you have paid no attention to what certainly ought to have moved you, to
the question of how it might be that we should burn the testament, and yet
stand fast in the inheritance which was described in that testament; but it
is marvellous that you have preserved the testament and lost the
inheritance. Is it not written in that testament, "Ask of me, and I shall
give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the
earth for thy possession"?(1) Take part in this inheritance, and you may
bring what charges you will against me about the testament. For what
madness is it, that while you shrank from committing the testament to the
flames, you should yet strive against the words of the testator! We, on the
other hand, though we hold in our hands the records of the Church and of
the State, in which we read that those who ordained a rival bishop(2) in
opposition to Caecilianus were rather the betrayers of the sacred books,
yet do not on this account insult you, or pursue you with invectives, or
mourn over the ashes of the sacred pages in your hands, or contrast the
burning torments of the Maccabees with the sacrilege of your fear, saying,
"You should deliver your own limbs to the flames rather than the utterances
of God." For we are unwilling to be so absurd as to excite an empty uproar
against you on account of the deeds of others, which you either know
nothing of, or else repudiate. But in that we see you separated from the
communion of the whole world (a sin both of the greatest magnitude, and
manifest to all mankind, and common to you all), if I were desirous of
exaggerating, I should find time failing me sooner than words. And if you
should seek to defend yourself on this charge, it could only be by bringing
accusations against the whole world, of such a kind that, if they could be
maintained, you would simply be furnishing matter for further accusation
against yourself; if they could not be maintained, there is in them no
defence for you. Why therefore do you puff yourself up against me about the
betrayal of the sacred books, which concerns neither you nor me if we abide
by the agreement not to charge each other with the sins of other men: and
which, if that agreement does not stand, affects you rather than me? And,
yet, even without any violation of that agreement, I think I may say with
perfect justice that he should be deemed a partner with him who delivered
up Christ who has not delivered himself up to Christ in company with the
whole world. "Then," says the apostle, "then are ye Abraham's seed, and
heirs according to the promise."(3) And again he says, "Heirs of God, and
joint-heirs with Christ."(4) And the same apostle shows that the seed of
Abraham belongs to all nations from the promise which was given to Abraham,
"In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed."(5) Wherefore I
consider that I am only making a fair demand in asking that we should for a
moment consider the testament of God, which has already long been opened,
and that we should consider every one to be himself an heir of the traitor
whom we do not find to be a joint-heir with Him whom he betrayed; that
every one should belong to him who sold Christ who denies that Christ has
bought the whole world. For when He showed Himself after His resurrection
to His disciples, and gave His limbs to those who doubted, that they should
handle them, He says this to them, "For thus it is written, and thus it
behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise again from the dead the third day:
and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name
among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."(6) See from what an inheritance
you estrange yourselves! see what an Heir you resist! Can it really be that
a man would spare Christ if He were walking here on earth who speaks
against Him while He sits in heaven? Do you not yet understand that
whatever you allege against us you allege against His words? A Christian
world is promised and believed in: the promise is fulfilled, and it is
denied. Consider, I entreat of you, what you ought to suffer for such
impiety. And yet, if I know not what you have suffered,--if I have not seen
it, have not wrought it,--then do you to-day, who do not suffer the
violence of my persecution, render to me an account of your separation. But
you are likely to say over and over again what, unless you prove it, can
affect no one, and if you prove it, has no bearing upon me.
CHAP. 9.--21. PETILIANUS said: "Hemmed in, therefore, by these
offenses, you cannot be a true bishop."
22. AUGUSTIN answered: By what offenses? What have you shown? What have
you proved? And if you have proved charges on the part of I know not whom,
what has that to do with the seed of Abraham, in which all the nations of
the earth are blessed?
CHAP. 10.--23. PETILIANUS said: "Did the apostle persecute any one? or
did Christ betray any one?"
24. AUGUSTIN answered: I might indeed say that Satan himself was worse
than all wicked men; and yet the apostle delivered a man over to him for
the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit might be saved in the day of
the Lord Jesus.(1) And in the same way he delivered over others, of whom he
says, "Whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to
blaspheme."(2) And the Lord Christ drove out the impious merchants from the
temple with scourges; in which connection we also find advanced the
testimony of Scripture, where it says, 'The zeal of Thine house hath eaten
me up."(3) So that we do find the apostle delivering over to condemnation,
and Christ a persecutor. All this I might say, and put you into no small
heat and perturbation, so that you would be compelled to inquire, not into
the complaints of those who suffer, but into the intention of those who
cause the suffering. But do not trouble yourself about this; I do not say
this. But I do say that it has nothing to do with the seed of, Abraham,
which is in all nations, if anything has been done to you which ought not
to have been done, perhaps by the chaff among the harvest of the Lord,
which in spite of this is found among all nations. Do you therefore
render an account of your separation. But first, consider what kind of men
you have among you, with whom you would not wish to be reproached; and see
how unjustly you act, when you cast in our teeth the acts of other men,
even if you proved what you assert. Therefore it will be found that there
is no ground for your separation.
CHAP. 11.--25. PETILIANUS said: "Yet some will be found to say, We are
not the sons of a traditor. Any one is the son of that man whose deeds he
imitates. For those are most assuredly sons, and at the same time bear a
strong resemblance to their parents, who are born in the likeness of their
parents, not only as being of their flesh and blood, but in respect of
their characters and deeds."
26. AUGUSTIN answered: A little while ago you were saying nothing
contrary to us, now you even begin to say something in our favor. For this
proposition of yours binds you to as much as this, that if you shall fail
to-day to convict us, with whom you are arguing, of being traditors and
murderers, and anything else with which you charge us, you will then be
wholly powerless to hurt us by any charge of the kind which you may prove
against those who have gone before us. For we cannot be the sons of those
to whose deeds our actions bear no resemblance. And see to what you have
committed yourself. If you should be so successful as to convict some man,
even of our own times, and living with us, of any guilt of the kind, that
is in no way to the prejudice of all the nations of the earth who are
blessed in the seed of Abraham, by separating yourself from whom you are
found to be guilty of sacrilege. Accordingly, unless (as is altogether
impossible) you are acquainted with all men that exist throughout the
world, and have not only made yourself familiar with all their characters
and deeds, but have also proved that they are as bad as you describe, you
have no ground for reproaching all the world, which is among the saints,
with parentage of I know not what description, to whom you prove that they
are like. Nor will it help you at all, even if you are able to show that
those who are not of the same character take the holy sacraments in common
with those who are. In the first place, because you ought yourselves to
look at those with whom you celebrate those sacraments, to whom you give
them, from whom you receive them, and whom you would be unwilling to have
cast up against you as a reproach. And again, if all those are the sons of
Judas, who was the devil among the apostles, who imitate his deeds, why do
we not call those of the sons of the apostles who make such men partakers,
not in their own deeds, but in the sacraments of the Lord, as the apostles
partook of the supper of the Lord in company with that traitor? and in this
way they are very different from you, who cast in the teeth of men who are
striving for the preservation of unity the very thing that you do to the
rending asunder of unity.
CHAP. 12.--27. PETILIANUS said: "The Lord Jesus said to the Jews
concerning Himself, 'If I do not the works of my Father, believe me
not.'"(4)
28. AUGUSTIN answered: I have already answered above, This is both
true, and makes for us against you.
CHAP. 13.--29. PETILIANUS said: Over and over again He reproaches the
false speakers and liars in such terms as these: 'Ye are the children of
the devil, for he also was a slanderer from the beginning, and abode not in
the truth.'"
30. AUGUSTIN answered: We are not wont to say, "He was a slanderer,"
but "He was a murderer."(5) But we ask how it was that the devil was a
murderer from the beginning; and we find that he slew the first man, not by
drawing a sword, nor by applying to him any bodily violence, but by
persuading him to sin, and thus driving him from the happiness of Paradise.
What, then, was Paradise is now represented by the Church. Therefore those
are the sons of the devil who slay men by withdrawing them from the Church.
But as by the words of God we know what was the situation of Paradise, so
now by the words of Christ we have learned where the Church is to be found:
"Throughout all nations," He says, "beginning at Jerusalem." Whosoever,
therefore, separates a man from that complete whole to place him in any
single part, is proved to be a son of the devil and a murderer. But see,
further, what is the application of the expression which you yourself
employed in saying of the devil, "He was a slanderer, and abode not in the
truth." For you bring an accusation against the whole world on account of
the sins of others, though even those others themselves you were more able
to accuse than to convict; and you abode not in the truth of Christ. For He
says that the Church is "throughout all nations, beginning at Jerusalem;"
but ye say that it is in the party of Donatus.
CHAP. 14.--31. PETILIANUS said: "In the third place, also, He calls the
madness of persecutors in like manner by this name, 'Ye generation of
vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send
unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some of them ye shall
kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and
persecute them from city to city: that upon you may come all the righteous
blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood
of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the
altar.'(1) Are they then really the sons of vipers according to the flesh,
and not rather serpents in mind, and three-tongued malice, and deadliness
of touch, and burning with the spirit of poison? They have truly become
vipers, who by their bites have vomited forth death against the innocent
people."
32. AUGUSTIN answered: If I were to say that this is said of men of
character like unto ourselves, you would reply, "Prove it." at then, have
you proved it? Or if you think that it is proved by the mere fact of its
being uttered, there is no need to repeat the same words. Pronounce the
same judgment against yourselves as coming from us to you. See you not that
I too have proved it, if this amounts to proof? And yet I would have you
learn what is really meant by proof. For indeed I do not even seek for
evidence from without to enable me to prove you vipers. For be well assured
that this very fact marks in you the nature of vipers, that you have not in
your mouth the foundation of truth, but the poison of slanderous abuse, as
it is written, "The poison of asps is under their lips."(2) And because
this might be said indiscriminately by any one against any one, as though
it were asked, Under whose lips? he immediately adds, "Their mouth is full
of cursing and bitterness."(3) When, therefore, you say such things as this
against men dispersed throughout the whole world, of whom you know nothing
whatsoever, and many of whom have never heard the name either of
Caecilianus or of Donatus, and when you do not hear them answering amid
silence, Nothing of what you say has reference to us; we never saw it; we
never did it; we are totally at a loss to understand what you are saying,--
seeing that you desire nothing else than to say what you are entirely
powerless to prove, how can you help allowing that your mouth is full of
cursing and bitterness? See, therefore, whether you can possibly show that
you are not vipers,(4) unless you show that all Christians throughout all
nations of the world are traditors, and murderers, and anything but
Christians. Nay, in very truth, even though you should be able to know and
set before us the lives and deeds of every individual man throughout the
world, yet before you can do that, seeing that you act as you do without
any consideration, your mouth is that of a viper, your mouth is full of
cursing and bitterness. Show to us now, if you can, what prophet, what wise
man, what scribe we have slain, or crucified, or scourged in our
synagogues. Look how much labor you have expended without in any way being
able to prove that Donatus and Marculus(5) were prophets, or wise men, or
scribes, because, in fact, they were nothing of the sort. But even if you
could prove as much as this, what progress would you have made towards
proving that they had been killed by us, when even we ourselves did not so
much as know them? and how much less the whole world, whom you calumniate
with poisonous mouth?(6) Or whence will you be able to prove that we have a
spirit like that of those who murdered them, when you actually cannot show
that they were murdered by any one at all? Look carefully to all these
points, see whether you can prove any single one of them either about the
whole world, or to the satisfaction of the whole world,--in your
persevering calumnies against which you show that the charges are true in
you, which you falsely propagate against the world.
33. Further, even if we should desire to prove you to be slayers of the
prophets, it would be too long a task to collect the evidence through all
the several instances of the slaughter which your infuriated leaders of the
Circumcelliones, and the actual crowd of men inflamed by wine and madness,
not only have committed since the beginning of your schism, but even
continue to commit at the present time. To take the case nearest at hand.
Let the divine utterances be produced, which are commonly in the hands of
both of us. Let us consider those to be murderers of the prophets whom we
find contradicting the words of the prophets. What more learned definition
could be given? What could admit of speedier proof? You would be acting
less, cruelly in piercing the bodies of the prophets, with a sword, than in
endeavoring to destroy the words of the prophets with your tongue. The
prophet says, "All the ends of the world l shall remember and turn unto the
Lord."(1) Behold and see how this is being done, how it is being fulfilled.
But you not only close your ears in disbelief against what is said, but you
even thrust out your tongues in madness to speak against what is already
being done. Abraham heard the promise, "In thy seed shall all the nations
of the earth be blessed,"(2) and "he believed, and it was counted unto him
for righteousness."(3) You see the fact accomplished, and you cry out
against it; and you will not that it should be counted unto you for
unrighteousness, as it fairly would be counted, even if your refusal to
believe was not on the accomplishment, but only on the utterance of the
prophecy. Nay, not only are you not willing that it should be counted unto
you for unrighteousness, but even what you suffer as the punishment of this
impiety you would fain have counted unto you for righteousness. Or if your
conduct is not a persecution of the prophets, because your instrument is
not the sword but the tongue, what was the reason of its being said trader
divine inspiration, "The sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows,
and their tongue a sharp sword"?(4) But what time would suffice me to
collect from all the prophets all the testimonies to the Church dispersed
throughout the world, all of which you endeavor to destroy and render
nought by contradicting them? But you are caught; for "their sound is gone
out into all lands, and their words to the end of the world."(5) I will,
however, advance this one saying from the mouth of the Lord, who is the
Witness of witnesses. "All things must be fulfilled," He says, "which were
written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms,
concerning me." And what these were let us hear from Himself: "Then opened
He their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures, and said
unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to
rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins
should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at
Jerusalem."(6) See what it is that is written in the law of Moses, and in
the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning the Lord. See what the Lord
Himself revealed about Himself and about the Church, making Himself
manifest, uttering promises about the Church. But for you, see that you
resist such manifest proofs as these, and as you cannot destroy them,
endeavor to pervert them, what would you do, if you were to come across the
bodies of the prophets, when you rage so madly against the utterances of
the prophets, as not even to hearken to the Lord when He is fulfilling, and
making manifest, and expounding the prophets? For do you not, to the utmost
of your power, strive to slay the Lord Himself, since even to Himself you
will not yield?
CHAP. 15.--34. PETILIANUS said: "David also spoke of you as persecutors
in the following terms: 'Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their
tongues have they deceived; the poison of asps is under their lips. Their
mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed
blood. Destruction and unhappiness is in their ways, and the way of peace
have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes. Have all
the workers of wickedness no knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat
bread?'"(7)
35. AUGUSTIN answered: Their throat is an open sepulchre, whence they
breathe out death by lies. For "the mouth that belieth slayeth the
soul."(8) But if nothing is more true than that which Christ said, that His
Church should be throughout all nations, beginning at Jerusalem, then there
is nothing more false than that which you say, that it is in the party of
Donatus. But the tongues which have deceived are the tongues of those who,
whilst they are acquainted with their own deeds, not only say that they are
just men, but that they are justifiers of men, which is said of One only
"that justifieth the ungodly,"(1) and that because "He is just and the
justifier."(2) As regards the poison of asps, and the mouth full of cursing
and bitterness, we have said enough already. But you have yourselves said
that the followers of Maximianus had feet swift to shed blood, as is
testified by the sentence of your plenary Council, so often quoted in the
records of the proconsular province and of the state. But they, so far as
we hear, never killed any one in the body. You evidently, therefore,
understood that the blood of the soul was shed in spiritual murder by the
sword of schism, which you condemned in Maximianus. See then if your feet
are not swift to shed blood, when you cut off men from the unity of the
whole world, if you were right in saying it of the followers of Maximianus,
because they cut off some from the party of Donatus. Are we again without
the knowledge of the way of peace, who study to preserve the unity of the
Spirit in the bond of peace? and yet do you possess that knowledge, who
resist the discourse which Christ held with His disciples after His
resurrection, of so peaceful a nature that He began it with the greeting,
"Peace be unto you;"(3) and that so strenuously that you are proved to be
saying nothing less to Him than this, "What Thou saidst of the unity of all
nations is false; what we say of the offense of all nations is true"? Who
would say such things as this if they had the fear of God before their
eyes? See, therefore, if in daily saying things like this you are not
trying to destroy the people of God dispersed throughout the world, eating
them up as it were bread.
CHAP. 16.--36. PETILIANUS said: "The Lord Christ also warns us, saying,
'Beware of false prophets, which come unto you in sheep's clothing, but
inwardly they are ravening wolves; and ye shall not know them by their
fruits.'"(4)
37. AUGUSTIN answered: If I were to inquire of you by what fruits you
know us to be ravening wolves, you are sure to answer by charging us with
the sins of other men, and these such as were never proved against those
who are said to have been guilty of them. But if you should ask of me by
what fruits we know you rather to be ravening wolves, I bring against you
the charge of schism, which you will deny, but which I will straightway go
on to prove; for, as a matter of fact, you do not communicate with all the
nations of the earth, nor with those Churches which were founded by the
labor of the apostles. Hereupon you will say, "I do not communicate with
traditors and murderers." The seed of Abraham answers you, "These are those
charges which you made, which are either not true, or have no reference to
me." But these I set aside for the present; do you meanwhile show me the
Church. Now that voice will sound in my ears which the Lord showed was to
be avoided in the false prophets who made a show of their several parties,
and strove to estrange men from the Catholic Church, "Lo, here is Christ,
or there." But do you think that the true sheep of Christ are so utterly
destitute of sense, who are told, "Believe it not,"(5) that they will
hearken to the wolf when he says, "Lo, here is Christ," and will not
hearken to the Shepherd when He says, "Throughout all nations, beginning at
Jerusalem?"
CHAP. 17.--38., PETILIANUS said: "Thus, thus, thou wicked persecutor,
under whatsoever cloak of righteousness thou hast concealed thyself, under
whatsoever name of peace thou wagest war with kisses, under whatsoever
title of unity thou endeavorest to ensnare the race of men--thou, who up to
this time art cheating and deceiving, thou art the true son of the devil,
showing thy parentage by thy character."
39. AUGUSTIN answered: Consider in reply that these things have been
said by us against you; and that you may know to which of us they are more
appropriate, call to mind what I have said before.
CHAP. 18.--40. PETILIANUS said: "Nor is it, after all, so strange that
you assume to yourself the name of bishop without authority. This is the
true custom of the devil, to choose in preference a mode of deceiving by
which he usurps to himself a word of holy meaning, as the apostle declares
to us: 'And no marvel,' he says: 'for Satan himself is transformed into an
angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be
transformed as the ministers of righteousness.'(6) Nor is it therefore a
marvel if you falsely call yourself a bishop. For even those fallen angels,
lovers of the maidens of the world, who were corrupted by the corruption of
their flesh, though, from having stripped themselves of divine excellence,
they have ceased to be angels, yet retain the name of angels, and always
esteem themselves as angels, though, being released from the service of
God, they have passed from the likeness of their character into the army of
the devil, as the great God declares, 'My spirit shall not always strive
with man, for that he also is flesh.'(1) To those guilty ones and to you
the Lord Christ will say, 'Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting
fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.'(2) If there were no evil
angels, the devil would have no angels; of whom the apostle says, that in
the judgment of the resurrection they shall be condemned by the saints:
'Know ye not,' says he, 'that we shall judge angels?'(3) If they were true
angels, men would not have authority to judge the angels of God. So too
those sixty apostles, who, when the twelve were left alone with the Lord
Christ, departed in apostasy from the faith, are so far yet considered
among wretched men to be apostles, that from them Manichaeus and the rest
entangle many souls in many devilish sects which they destroyed(4) that
they might take them in their snares. For indeed the fallen Manichaeus, if
fallen he was, is not to be reckoned among those sixty, if it be that we
can find his name as an apostle among the twelve, or if he was ordained by
the voice of Christ when Matthias was elected into the place of the traitor
Judas, or another thirteenth like Paul, who calls himself the last(5) of
the apostles, expressly that any one who was later than himself might not
be held to be an apostle. For these are his words: 'For I am the last of
the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I
persecuted the Church of God.'(6) And do not flatter yourselves in this: he
was a Jew that had done this. You too, as Gentiles, may work destruction
upon us. For you carry on war without license, against whom we may not
fight in turn. For you desire to live when you have murdered us; but our
victory is either to escape or to be slain."
41. AUGUSTIN answered: See how you have quoted the testimony of holy
Scripture, or how you have understood it, when it has no bearing at all
upon the present point at issue. For all that you have brought forward was
simply said to prove that there are false bishops, just as there are false
angels and false apostles. Now we too know quite well that there are false
angels and false apostles, and false bishops, and, as the true apostle
says, false brethren also;(7) but, seeing that charges such as yours may be
brought by either side against the other, what is required is a certain
degree of proof, and not mere empty words. But if you would see to which of
us the charge of falseness more truly applies, recall to mind what we have
said before, land you will see it there set forth, that we may not become
tedious to our readers by repeating the same thing over and over again. And
yet how is the Church dispersed throughout the world affected either by
what you may have found to say about its chaff, which is mixed with it
throughout the whole world; or by what you said of Manichaeus and the other
devilish sects? For if the wheat is not affected by anything which is said
even about the chaff which is still mingled with it, how much less are the
members of Christ dispersed throughout the whole world affected by
monstrosities (8) which have been so long and so openly separated from
it?(9)
CHAP. 19.--42. PETILIANUS said: "The Lord Jesus Christ commands us,
saying, 'When they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another; and if
they persecute you in that, flee yet into a third; for verily I say unto
you, ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man
be come.'(10) If He gives us this warning in the case of Jews and pagans,
you who call yourself a Christian ought not to imitate the dreadful deeds
of the Gentiles. Or do you serve God in such wise that we should be
murdered at your hands? You do err, you do err, if you are wretched enough
to entertain such a belief as this. For God does not have butchers for His
priests."
43. AUGUSTIN answered: To flee from one state to another from the face
of persecution has not been enjoined as precept or permission on heretics
or schismatics, such as you are; but it was enjoined on the preachers of
the gospel, whom you resist. And this we may easily prove in this wise: you
are now in your own cities, and no man persecutes you. You must therefore
come forth, and give an account of your separation. For it cannot be
maintained that, as the weakness of the flesh is excused when it yields
before the violence of persecution, so truth also ought to yield to
falsehood. Furthermore, if you are suffering persecution, why do you i not
retire from the cities in which you are, that you may fulfill the
instructions which you quote out of the gospel? But if you are not
suffering persecution, why are you unwilling to reply to us? Or if the fact
be that you are afraid lest, when you should have made reply, you then
should suffer persecution, in that ease how are you following the example
of those preachers to whom it was said, "Behold, I send you forth as sheep
in the midst of wolves?" To whom it was also further said "Fear not them
which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul."(1) And how do you
escape the charge of acting contrary to the injunction of the Apostle
Peter, who says, "Be ready always to give an answer to every man that
asketh you a reason of the faith and hope that is in you?"(2) And, lastly,
wherefore are you ever eager to annoy thee Catholic Churches by the most
violent disturbances, whenever it is in your power, as is proved by
innumerable instances of simple fact? But you say that you must defend your
places, and that you resist with cudgels and massacres and with whatever
else you can. Wherefore in such a case did you not hearken to the voice of
the Lord, when He says, "But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil"?(3)
Or, allowing that it is possible that in some cases it should be right for
violent men to be resisted by bodily force, and that it does not violate
the precept which we receive from the Lord, "But I say unto you, that ye
resist not evil," why may it not also be that a pious man should eject an
impious man, or a just man him that is unjust, in the exercise of duly and
lawfully constituted authority, from seats which are unlawfully usurped, or
retained to the despite of God? For you would not say that the false
prophets suffered persecution at the hands of Elijah, in the same sense
that Elijah suffered persecution from the wickedest of kings?(4) Or that
because the Lord was scourged by His persecutors, therefore those whom He
Himself drove out of the temple with scourges are to be put in comparison
with His sufferings? It remains, therefore, that we should acknowledge that
there is no other question requiring solution, except whether you have been
pious or impious in separating yourselves from the communion of the whole
world. For if it shall be found that you have acted impiously, you would
not be surprised if there should be no lack of ministers of God by whom you
might be scourged, seeing that you suffer persecution not from us, but as
it is written, from their own abominations.(5)
CHAP. 20.--44. PETILIANUS said: "The Lord Christ cries again from
heaven to Paul, 'Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee
to kick against the pricks.'(6) He was then called Saul, that he might
afterwards receive his true name in baptism. But for you it is not hard so
often to persecute Christ in the persons of His priests, though the Lord
Himself cries out, 'Touch not mine anointed.'(7) Reckon up all the deaths
of the saints, and so often have you murdered Christ, who lives in each of
them.(8) Lastly, if you are not guilty of sacrilege, then a saint cannot be
a murderer."
45. AUGUSTIN answered: Defend yourselves from the charge of the
persecution which those men suffered at the hands of your party who
separated themselves from you with the followers of Maximianus, and therein
you will find our defence. For if you say that you committed no such deeds,
we simply read to you the records of the pro-consular province and the
state. If you say that you were right in persecuting them, why are you
unwilling to suffer the like yourselves? If you say, "But we caused no
schism," then let this be inquired into, and, till it is decided whether it
be so or not, let no one make accusation against persecutors. If you say
that even schismatics ought not to have suffered persecution, I ask whether
it is also the case that they ought not to have been driven out of the
basilicas, in which they lay snares for the leading astray of the weak,
even though it were done by duly constituted authorities? If you say that
this also should not have been done, first restore the basilicas to the
followers of Maximianus, and then discuss the point with us. If you say
that it was right, then see what they ought to suffer at the hands of duly
constituted authority, who, in resisting it, "resist the ordinance of God."
Wherefore the apostle expressly says, "For he beareth not the sword in
vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath on him
that doeth evil."(9) But even if this had been discovered after the truth
had been searched out with all diligence, that not even after public trial
ought schismatics to undergo any punishment, or be driven from the
positions which they have occupied, for their treachery and deceit; and if
you should say that you are vexed that the followers of Maximianus should
have suffered such conduct at the hands of some of you,--why does not the
wheat of the Lord cry out with the more freedom from the whole field of the
Lord, that is, from the world, and say, Neither are we at all affected by
what the tares and the chaff amongst us do, seeing that it is contrary to
our wish? If you confess that it is sufficient to clear you of
responsibility, that all the evil that is done by men of your party is done
in opposition to your wishes, why then have you separated yourselves? For
if your reason for not separating from the unrighteous among the party of
Donatus is that each man bears his own burden, why have you separated
yourselves from those throughout the world whom you think, or profess to
think, to be unrighteous? Is it that you might all share equally in bearing
the burden of schism?
46. And when we ask of you which of your party you can prove to have
been slain by us, I indeed can remember no law issued by the emperors to
the effect that you should be put to death. Those indeed whose deaths you
quote most frequently to bring us into odium, Marculus and Donatus, present
a great question,--whether they threw themselves down a precipice, as your
teaching does not hesitate to encourage by examples of daily occurrence, or
whether they were thrown down by the true command of some authority. For if
it is a thing incredible that the leaders of the Circumcelliones should
have wrought upon themselves a death in accordance with their custom, how
much more incredible it is that the Roman authorities should have been able
to condemn them to a punishment at variance with custom! Accordingly, in
considering this matter, which you think excessive in its hatefulness,
supposing what you say is true, what is there in it which bears upon the
Lord's wheat? Let the chaff which flew away outside accuse the chaff which
yet remained within for it is not possible that it should all be separated
till the winnowing at the last day. But if what you say is false, what
wonder is it if, when the chaff is carried away as it were by a light blast
of dissension, it even attacks the wheat of the Lord with false
accusations? Wherefore, on the consideration of all such odious
accusations, the wheat of Christ, which is ordered to grow together with
the tares throughout the field, that is, throughout the whole world, makes
this answer to you with a free and fearless voice: If you cannot prove what
you say, it has no application to any one; and if you prove it, it yet does
not apply to me. The result of which is, that whosoever has separated
himself from the unity of the wheat on account of the offenses chargeable
against the tares, or against the chaff, is unable to defend himself from
the charge of murder which is involved in the mere offense of dissension
and schism, as the Scripture says, "Whoso hateth his brother is a
murderer."(1)
CHAP. 21.--47. PETILIANUS said: "Accordingly, as we have said, the Lord
Christ cried, 'Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee to
kick against the pricks. And he said, Who art Thou, Lord? And the Lord
said, I am Christ of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. And he, trembling and
astonished, said, Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? And the Lord said
unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou
must do.' And so presently it goes on, 'But Saul arose from the earth; and
when his eyes were opened, he saw no man,' See here how blindness, coming
in punishment of madness, obscures the light in the eyes of the persecutor,
not to be again expelled except by baptism! Let us see, therefore, what he
did in the city. 'Ananias,' it is said, 'entered into the house to Saul,
and putting his hands on him, said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus,
that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou
mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And
immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales; and he received
sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.'(2) Seeing therefore that
Paul, being freed by baptism from the offense of persecution, received
again his eyesight freed from guilt, why will not you, a persecutor and
traditor, blinded by false baptism be baptized by those whom you
persecute?"
48. AUGUSTIN answered: You do not prove that I, whom you wish to
baptize afresh, am either a persecutor or a traditor. And if you prove this
charge against any one, yet the persecutor and traditor is not to be
baptized afresh., if he had been baptized already with the baptism of
Christ. For the reason why it was necessary that Paul should be baptized
was that he had never been washed in any baptism of the kind. Therefore
what you have chosen to insert about Paul has no point of resemblance with
the case which you are arguing with us. But if you had not inserted this,
you would have found no place for your childish declamation, "See how
blindness comes in punishment of madness, not to be again expelled except
by baptism!" For with how much more force might one exclaim against you,
See how blindness comes in punishment of madness, which, finding its
similitude in Simon, not in Paul, is not expelled from you even when you
have received baptism? For if persecutors ought to be batpized by those
whom they persecute, then let Primianus be baptized by the followers of
Maximianus, whom he persecuted with the utmost eagerness.
CHAP. 22.--49. PETILIANUS said: "It may be urged that Christ said to
His apostles, as you are constantly quoting against us, 'He that is washed
needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.' Now if you
discuss those words in all their fullness, you are bound by what
immediately follows. For this is what He said, in His very words: 'He that
is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whir: and
ye are clean, but not all. But this he said on account of Judas, who should
betray Him; therefore said He, Ye are not all clean.'(1) Whosoever,
therefore, has incurred the guilt of treason, has forfeited, like you, his
baptism. Again, after that the betrayer of Christ had himself been
condemned, He thus more fully confirmed His words to the eleven apostles:
'Now are ye clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in
me, and I in you.'(2) And again He said to these same eleven, 'Peace I
leave with you, my peace I give unto you.'(3) Seeing, then, that these
things were said to the eleven apostles, when the traitor, as we have seen,
had been condemned, you likewise, being traditors, are similarly without
both peace and baptism."
50. AUGUSTIN answered: If therefore every traditor has forfeited his
baptism, it will follow that every one who, having been baptized by you,
has afterwards become a traditor, ought to be baptized afresh. And if you
do not do this, you yourselves sufficiently prove the falseness of the
saying, "Whosoever therefore has incurred the guilt of treason, has
forfeited, like you, his baptism." For if he has forfeited it, let him
return and receive it again; but if he returns and does not receive it, it
is clear that he had not forfeited it. Again, if the reason why it was said
to the apostles, "Now are ye clean," and "My peace I give unto you," was
that the traitor had already left the room, then was not that supper of so
great a sacrament clean and able to give peace, which He distributed to all
before his going out? And if you venture to say this with your eyes closed
against the truth, what can we do save exclaim the more, See how blindness
comes in punishment of the madness of those who wish to be, as the apostle
says, "teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say, nor
whereof they affirm?"(4) And yet, unless blindness came in the way of their
pertinacity, it was not a very difficult matter that you should understand
and see that the Lord did not say in the presence of Judas, Ye are not yet
clean, but "Now are ye clean." He added, however, "But not all," because
there was one there who was not clean; yet if he had been polluting the
others by his presence, it would not have been declared to them, "Now are
ye clean," but, as I said before, Ye are not yet clean. But, after Judas
had gone out, He said to them, "Now are ye clean," and did not add the
words, But not all, because he had now departed in whose presence indeed,
as had been said to them, they were already clean, but not all, because
there was one there unclean. Wherefore in these words the Lord rather
declared that in the one company of men receiving the same sacraments, the
uncleanness of some members cannot hurt the clean. Certainly, if you think
that there are among us men like Judas, you might apply to us the words,
"Ye are clean, but not all." But this is not what you say; but you say that
because of the presence of some who are unclean, therefore we are all
unclean. This the Lord did not say to the disciples in the presence of
Judas, and therefore whoever says this has not learned from the good Master
what He says.
CHAP. 23.--51. PETILIANUS said: "But if you say that we give baptism
twice over, truly it is rather you who do this, who slay men who have been
baptized; and this we do not say because you baptize them, but because you
cause each one of them, by the act of slaying him, to be baptized in his
own blood. For the baptism of water or of the Spirit is as it were doubled
when the blood of the martyr is wrung from him. And so our Saviour also
Himself, after being baptized in the first instance by John, declared that
He must be baptized again, not this time with water nor with the Spirit,
but with the baptism of blood, the cross of suffering, as it is written,
'Two disciples, the sons of Zebedee, came unto Him, saying, Lord, when thou
comest into thy kingdom grant that we may sit, one on Thy right hand, and
the other on Thy left hand. But Jesus said unto them, Ye ask a difficult
thing: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of, and be baptized with the
baptism that I am baptized with? They said unto Him, We are able. And He
said unto them, Ye can indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with
the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized,'(5) and so
forth. If these are two baptisms, you commend us by your malice, we must
needs confess. For when you kill our bodies, then we do celebrate a second
baptism; but it is that we are baptized with our baptism and with blood,
like Christ. Blush, blush, ye persecutors. Ye make martyrs like unto
Christ, who are sprinkled with the baptism of blood after the water of the
genuine baptism."
52. AUGUSTIN answered: In the first place, we reply without delay that
we do not kill you, I but you kill yourselves by a true death, when you cut
yourselves off from the living root of unity. In the next place, if all who
are killed are baptized in their own blood, then all robbers, all
unrighteous, impious, accursed men, who are put to death by the sentence of
the law, are to be considered martyrs, because they are baptized in their
own blood. But if only those are baptized in their own blood who are put to
death for righteousness' sake, since theirs is the kingdom of heaven,(1)
you have already seen that the first question is why you suffer, and only
afterwards should we ask what you suffer. Why therefore do you puff out
your cheeks before you have shown the righteousness of your deeds? Why,
does your tongue resound before your character is approved? If you have
made a schism, you are impious; if you are impious, you die as one guilty
of sacrilege, when you are punished for impiety; if you die as one guilty
of sacrilege, how are you baptized in your blood? Or do you say, I have not
made a schism? Let us then inquire into this. Why do you make an outcry
before you prove your case?
53. Or do you say, Even if I am guilty of sacrilege, I ought not to be
slain by you? It is one question as to the enormity of my action, which you
never prove with any truth, another as to the baptism of your blood, from
whence you derive your boast. For I never killed you, nor do you prove that
you are killed by any one. Nor even if you were to prove it would it in any
way affect me, whoever it was that killed you, whether he did it justly in
virtue of power lawfully given by the Lord, or committed the crime of
murder, like the chaff of the Lord's harvest, through some evil desire;
just as you are in no way concerned with him who in recent times, with an
intolerable tyranny, attended even by a company of soldiers, not because he
feared any one, but that he might be feared by all, oppressed widows,
destroyed pupils, betrayed the patrimonies of other men, annulled the
marriages of other men, contrived the sale of the property of the innocent,
divided the price of the property when sold with its mourning owners. I
should seem to be saying all this out of the invention of my own head, if
it were not sufficiently obvious of whom I speak without the mention of his
name.(2) And if all this is undoubtedly true, then just as you are not
concerned with this, so neither are we concerned with anything you say,
even though it were true. But if that colleague of yours, being really a
just and innocent man, is maligned by a lying tale, then should we also
learn in no way to give credit to reports, which have been spread abroad of
innocent men, as though they had delivered up the sacred books, or murdered
any of their fellow-men. To this we may add, that I refer to a man who
lived with you, whose birthday you were wont to celebrate with such large
assemblies, with whom you joined in the kiss of peace in the sacraments, in
whose hands you placed the Eucharist, to whom in turn you extended your
hands to receive it from his ministering, whose ears, when they were deaf
amid the groanings of all Africa, you durst not offend by free speech; for
paying to whom, even indirectly, a most witty compliment, by saying that in
the Count(3) he had a god for his companion, some one of your party was
extolled to the skies. But you reproach us with the deeds of men with whom
we never lived, whose faces we never saw, in whose lifetime we were either
boys, or perhaps as yet not even born. What is the meaning, then, of your
great unfairness and perversity, that you should wish to impose on us the
burdens of those whom we never knew, whilst you will not bear the burdens
of your friends? The divine Scriptures exclaim: "When thou sawest a thief,
then thou consentedst with him." If he whom you saw did not pollute you,
why do you reproach me with one whom I could not have seen? Or do you say,
I did not consent with him, because his deeds were displeasing to me? But,
at any rate, you went up to the altar of God with him. Come now, if you
would defend yourself, make a distinction between your two positions, and
say that it is one thing to consent together for sin, as the two elders
consented together when they laid a plot against the chastity of Susannah,
and another thing to receive the sacrament of the Lord in company with a
thief, as the apostles received even that first supper in company with
Judas. I am all in favor of your defense. But why do you not consider how
much more easily, in the course of your defense, you have acquitted all the
nations and boundaries of the earth, throughout which the inheritance of
Christ is dispersed? For if it was possible for you to see a thief, and to
share the sacraments with the thief whom you saw, and yet not to share his
sin, how much less was it possible for the remotest nations of the earth to
have anything in common with the sins of African traditors and persecutors,
supposing your charges and assertions to be true, even though they held the
sacraments in common with them? Or do you say, I saw in him the bishop, I
did not see in him the thief? Say what you will. I allow this defense also,
and in this the world is acquitted of the charges which you brought against
it. For if it was permitted you to ignore the character of a man whom you
knew, why is the whole world not allowed to be ignorant of those it never
knew, unless, indeed, the Donatists are allowed to be ignorant of what they
do not wish to know, while the nations of the earth may not be ignorant of
what they cannot know?
54. Or do you say, Theft is one thing, delivery of the sacred books or
persecution is another? I grant there is a difference, nor is it worth
while now to show wherein that difference consists. But listen to the
summary of the argument. If he could not make you a thief, because his
thieving was displeasing in your sight, who can make men traditors or
murderers to whom such treachery or murder is abhorrent? First, then,
confess that you share in all the evil of Optatus, whom you knew, and even
so reproach me with any evil which was found in those whom I knew not. And
do not say to me, But my charges are serious, yours but trifling. You must
first acknowledge them, however trifling they may be in your case, not
before I on my side confess the charges against me, but before I can allow
you to say these serious things about me at all. Did Optatus, whom you knew
make you a thief by being your colleague, or not? Answer me one or the
other. If you say he did not, I ask why he did not,--because he was not a
thief himself? or because you do not know it? or because you disapprove of
it? If you say, Because he himself was not a thief, much more ought we not
to believe that those with whom you reproach us were of such a character as
you assert. For if we must not believe of Optatus what both Christians and
pagans and Jews, ay, and what both our party and yours assert, how much
less should we believe what you assert of any one? But if you say, Because
you do not know it, all the nations of the earth answer you, Much more do
we not know of all that you reproach us with in these men. But if you say,
Because you disapproved of it, they answer you with the same voice,
Although you have never proved the truth of what you say, yet acts like
these are viewed by us with disapproval. But if you say, Lo, Optatus, whom
I knew, made me a thief because he was my colleague, and I was in the habit
of going to the altar with him when he committed those deeds; but I do not
greatly heed it, because the fault was trivial, but your party made you a
traditor and a murderer,--I answer that I do not allow that I too am made a
traditor and a murderer by the sins of other men, just because you confess
that you are made a thief by the sin of another man; for it must be
remembered that you are proved a thief, not by our judgment, but by your
own confession. For we say that every man must bear his own burden, as the
apostle is our witness.(1) But you, of your own accord, have taken the
burden of Optatus on your own shoulders, not because you committed the
theft, or consented to it, but because you declared your conviction that
what another did applied to you. For, as the apostle says, when speaking of
food, "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing
unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him
it is unclean;"(2) by the same rule, it may be said that the sins of others
cannot implicate those who disapprove of them; but if any one thinks that
they affect him, then he is affected by them. Wherefore you do not convict
us of being traditors or murderers, even though you were to prove something
of the sort against those who share the sacraments with us; but the guilt
of theft is fastened on you, even if you disapprove of everything that
Optatus did, not in virtue of our accusation, but by your own decision. And
that you may not think this a trivial fault, read what the apostle says,
"Nor shall thieves inherit the kingdom of God."(3) But those who shall not
inherit the kingdom of God will certainly not be on His right hand among
those whom it shall be said, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the
kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.' If they are not
there, where will they be except on the left hand? Therefore among those to
whom it shall be said, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,
prepared for the devil and his angels."(4) In vain, therefore, do you
indulge in your security, thinking it a trivial fault which separates you
from the kingdom of God, and sends you into everlasting fire. How much
better will you do to betake yourself to true confusion, saying, Every one
of us shall bear his own burden, and the winnowing fan at the last day
shall separate the chaff from the wheat!
55. But it is evident that you are afraid of its being forthwith said
to you, "Why then, whilst you attempt to place on some men's backs the
burdens of their neighbors, have you dared to separate yourselves from the
Lord's corn, dispersed throughout the world, before the winnowing at the
last day?" Accordingly, you who disapprove of the deeds of your party,
whilst you are taking precautions against being charged with the schism
which you all have made, are involving yourselves also in their sins which
you did not commit; and while the shrewd Petilianus is afraid of my being
able to say that am I not such as he thinks Caecilianus was, he is obliged
to confess that he himself is such as he knows Optatus to have been. Or are
you not such as the common voice of Africa proclaims him to have been? Then
neither are we such as those with whom you reproach us are either suspected
to have been by your mistake, or calumniously asserted to have been by your
madness, or proved to have been by the truth. Much less is the wheat of the
Lord in all the nations of the earth of such a character, seeing that it
never heard the names of those of whom you speak. There is therefore no
reason why you should perish in such sin of separation and such sacrilege
of schism. And yet, if you are made to suffer for this great impiety by the
judgment of God, you say that you are even baptized in your blood; so that
you are not content with feeling no remorse for your division, but you must
even glory. in your punishment.
CHAP. 24.--56. PETILIANUS said: "But you will answer that you abide by
the same declaration, 'He that is once washed needeth not save to wash his
feet.'(1) Now the 'once' is once that has authority, once that is confirmed
by the truth."
57. AUGUSTIN answered: Baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son
and of the Holy Ghost(2) has Christ for its authority, not any man, whoever
he may be; and Christ is the truth, not any man.
CHAP. 25.--58. PETILIANUS said: "For when you in your guilt perform
what is false, I do not celebrate baptism twice, which you have never
celebrated once."
59. AUGUSTIN answered: In the first place, you do not convict us of
guilt. And if a guilty man baptizes with a false baptism, then none of
those have true baptism who are baptized by men in your party, that are, I
do not say openly, but even secretly guilty. For if he who gives baptism
gives something that is God's, if he is already guilty in the sight of God,
how can he be giving something that is God's if a guilty man cannot give
true baptism? But in reality you wait till he is guilty in your sight as
well, as though what he proposes to confer were something that belonged to
you.
CHAP. 26.--60. PETILIANUS said: "For if you mix what is false with what
is true, falsehood often imitates the truth by treading in its steps. Just
in the same way a picture imitates the true man of nature, depicting with
its colors the false resemblance of truth. And in the same way, too, the
brilliancy of a mirror catches the countenance, so as to represent the eyes
of him who gazes on it. In this way it presents to each comer his own
countenance, so that the very features of the comer meet themselves in
turn; and of such virtue is the falsehood of a clear mirror, that the very
eyes which see themselves recognize themselves as though in some one else.
And even when a shadow stands before it, it doubles the reflection,
dividing its unity in great part through a falsehood. Must we then hold
that anything is true, because a lying representation is given of it? But
it is one thing to paint a man, another to give birth to one. For does any
one represent fictitious children to a man who wishes for an heir? or would
any one look for true heirs in the falsehood of a picture? Truly it is a
proof of madness to fall in love with a picture, letting go one's hold of
what is true."
61. AUGUSTIN answered: Are you then really not ashamed to call the
baptism of Christ a lie, even when it is found in the most false of men?
Far be it from any one to suppose that the wheat of the Lord, which has
been commanded to grow among the tares throughout the whole field, that is,
throughout the whole of this world, until the harvest, that is, until the
end of the world,(3) can have perished in consequence of your evil words.
Nay, even among the very tares themselves, which are commanded not to be
gathered, but to be tolerated even to the end, and among the very chaff,
which shall only be separated from the wheat by the winnowing at the last
day,(4) does any one dare to say that any baptism is false which is given
and received in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost? Would you say that those whom you depose from their office, whether
as your colleagues or your fellow-priests, on the testimony of women whom
they have seduced (since examples of this kind are not wanting anywhere),
were false or true before their crime was proved against them? You will
certainly answer, False. Why then were they able both to have and to give
true baptism? Why did not their falseness as men corrupt in them the truth
of God? Is it not most truly written, "For the Holy Spirit of discipline
will flee deceit?"(1) Seeing then that the Holy Spirit fled from them, how
came it that the truth of baptism was in them, except because what the Holy
Spirit fled from was the falseness of man, not the truth of the sacrament?
Further, if even the deceitful have the true baptism, how do they have it
who possess it in truthfulness? Whence you ought to observe that it is
rather your conversation which is colored with childish pigments; and
accordingly, he who neglects the living Word to take pleasure in such
coloring is himself loving the picture in the place of the reality.
CHAP. 27.--62. PETILIANUS said: "It will be urged against us, that the
Apostle Paul said, 'One Lord, one faith, one baptism.'(2) We profess that
there is only one; for it is certain that those who declare that there are
two are mad."
63. AUGUSTIN replied: These words of yours are arguments against
yourselves; but in your madness you are not aware of it. For the men who
say there are two baptisms are those who declare their opinion that the
just and the unjust have different baptisms; whereas it belongs neither to
one party nor the other, but in both of them is one, being Christ's,
although they themselves are not one: and yet the baptism, which is one,
the just have to salvation, the unjust to their destruction.
CHAP. 28.--64. PETILIANUS said: "But yet, if I may be allowed the
comparison, it is certain that the sun appears double to the insane,
although it only be that a dark blue cloud often meets it, and its
discolored surface, being struck by the brightness, while the rays of the
sun are reflected from it, seems to send forth as it were rays of its own.
So in the same way in the faith of baptism, it is one thing to seek for
reflections, another to recognize the truth."
65. AUGUSTIN answered: What are you saying, if I may ask? When a dark
blue cloud reflects the rays of the sun with which it is struck, is it only
to the insane, and not to all who look on it, that there appear to be two
suns? But when it appears so to the insane as such, it appears to them
alone. But if I may say so without being troublesome, I would have you take
care test saying such things and talking in such a way should be itself a
sign of madness. I suppose, however, that what you meant to say was this,--
that the just had the truth of baptism, the unjust only its reflection. And
if this be so, I venture to say that the reflection was found in that man
of our party,(3) to whom not God, but a certain Count,(4) was God; but that
the truth was either in you or in him who uttered the witty saying against
Optatus, when he said that "in the Count he had a god for his
companion."(5) And distinguish between those who were baptized by either of
these, and in the one party approve the true baptism, in the others exclude
the reflection, and introduce the truth.
CHAP. 29.--66. PETILIANUS said: "But to pass rapidly through these
minor points: can he be said to lay down the law who is not a magistrate of
the court? or is what he lays down to be considered law, when in the
character of a private person he disturbs public rights? Is it not rather
the case that he not only involves himself in guilt, but is held to be a
forger, and that which he composes a forgery?"
67. AUGUSTIN answered: What if your private person, whom you deem a
forger, were to set forth to any one the law of the emperor? Would not the
man, when he had compared it with the law of those who have the genuine
law, and found it to be identically the same, lay aside all care about the
source from which he had obtained it, and consider only what he had
obtained? For what the forger gives is false when he gives it of his own
falseness; but when something true is given by any person, even though he
be a forger, yet, although the giver be not truthful, the gift is
notwithstanding true.
CHAP. 30.--68. PETILIANUS said: "Or if any one chance to recollect the
chants of a priest, is he therefore to be deemed a priest, because with
sacrilegious mouth he publishes the strain of a priest?"
69. AUGUSTIN answered: In this question you are speaking just as though
we were at present inquiring what constituted a true priest, not what
constituted true baptism. For that a man should be a true priest, it is
requisite that he should be clothed not with the sacrament alone, but with
righteousness, as it is written, "Let thy priests be clothed with
righteousness."(1) But if a man be a priest in virtue of the sacrament
alone, as was the high priest Caiaphas, the persecutor of the one most true
Priest, then even though he himself be not truthful, yet what he gives is
true, if he gives not what is his own but what is God's; as it is said of
Caiaphas himself, "This spake he not of himself: but being high priest that
year, he prophesied."(2) And yet, to use the same simile which you employed
yourself: if you were to hear even from any one that was profane the prayer
of l the priest couched in the words suitable to the mysteries of the
gospel, can you possibly say to him, Your prayer is not true, though he
himself may be not only no true priest, but not a priest at all? seeing
that the Apostle Paul said that certain testimony of I know not what Cretan
prophet was true, though he was not reckoned among the prophets of God for
he says, "One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said the Cretians
are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies: this witness is true."(3) If,
therefore, the apostle even himself bore witness to the testimony of some
obscure prophet of a foreign race, because he found it to be true, why do
not we, when we find in any one what belongs to Christ, and is true even
though the man with whom it may be found be deceitful and perverse, why do
not we in such a case make a distinction between the fault which is found
in the man, and the truth which he has not of his own but of God's? and why
do we not say, This sacrament is true, as Paul said, "This witness is
true'"? Does it at all follow that we say, The man himself also is
truthful, because we say, This sacrament is true? Just as I would ask
whether the apostle counted that prophet among the prophets of the Lord,
because he confirmed the truth of what he found to he true in him. Likewise
the same apostle, when he was at Athens, perceived a certain altar among
the altars of the false gods, on which was this inscription, "To the
unknown God." And this testimony he made use of to build them up in Christ,
to the extent of quoting the inscription in his sermon, and adding, "Whom,
therefore, ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you." Did he, because
he found that altar among the altars of idols, or set up by sacrilegious
hands, therefore condemn or reject what he found in it that was true? or
did he, because of the truth which he found upon it, therefore persuade
them that they ought also to follow the sacrilegious practices of the
pagans? Surely he did neither of the two; but presently, when, as he judged
fitting, he wished to introduce to their knowledge the Lord Himself unknown
to them, but known to him, he says among other things, that "He is not far
from every one of us: for in Him we live, and move, and have our being; as
certain also of your own poets have said."(4) Can it be said that here
also, because he found among the sacrilegious, the evidence of truth, he
either approved their wickedness because of the evidence, or condemned the
evidence because of their wickedness? But it is unavoidable that you should
be always in the wrong, so long as you do despite to the sacraments of God
because of the faults of men, or think that we take upon ourselves the
sacrilege even of your schism, for the sake of the sacraments of God, to
which we are unwilling to do despite in you.
CHAP. 31.--70. PETILIANUS said: "For there is no power but of God,'"(5)
none in any man of power; as the Lord Jesus Christ answered Pontius Pilate,
'Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee
from above.'(6) And again, in the words of John, 'A man can receive
nothing, except it be given him from heaven.'(7) Tell us, therefore,
traditor, when you received the power of imitating the mysteries."
71. AUGUSTIN answered: Tell us rather thyself when the power of
baptizing was lost by the whole world through which is dispersed the
inheritance of Christ, and by all that multitude of nations in which the
apostles rounded the Churches. You will never be able to tell us,--not only
because you have calumniated them, and do not prove them to be traditors,
but because, even if you did prove this, yet no guilt on the part of any
evil-doers, whether they be unsuspected, or deceitful, or be tolerated as
the tares or as the chaff, can possibly overthrow the promises, so that all
the nations of the earth should not be blessed in the seed of Abraham; in
which promises you deprive them of their share when you will not have the
communion of unity with all nations of the earth.
CHAP. 32.--72. PETILIANUS said: "For although there is only one
baptism, yet it is consecrated in three several grades. John gave water
without the name Of the Trinity, as he declared himself, saying, 'I indeed
baptize you with water unto repentance: but He that cometh after me is
mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; He shall baptize you
with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.'(1) Christ gave the Holy Spirit, as it
is written, 'He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy
Ghost,'(2) And the Comforter Himself came on the apostles as a fire burning
with rustling flames. O true divinity, which seemed to blaze, not to burn!
as it is written, 'And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a
rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where the apostles were
sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire, and
it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and
began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.'(3)
But you, O persecutor, have not even the water of repentance, seeing that
you hold the power not of the murdered John, but of the murderer Herod. You
therefore, O traditor, have not the Holy Spirit of Christ; for Christ did
not betray others to death, but was Himself betrayed. For you, therefore,
the fire in the spirit in Hades is full of life,--that fire which, surging
with hungry tongues of flame, will be able to burn your limbs to all
eternity without consuming them, as it is Written of the punishment of the
guilty in hell, 'Neither shall their fire be quenched.'"(4)
73. AUGUSTIN answered: You are the calumnious slanderer, not the
truthful arguer. Will you not at length cease to make assertions of a kind
which, if you do not prove them, can apply to nobody; and even if you prove
them, certainly cannot apply to the unity of the whole world, which is in
the saints as in the wheat of God? If we too were pleased to return
calumnies for calumnies, we too might possibly be able to give vent to
eloquent slanderers. We too might use the expression, "With rustling
flames;" but to me an expression never sounds in any way eloquent Which is
inappropriate in its use. We too might say, "Surging with hungry tongues of
flame;" but we do not wish that the tongues of flame in our writings, when
they are read by any one in his senses, should be judged hungry for want of
the sap of weightiness, or that the reader himself, while he finds in them
no food of useful sentiments, should be left to suffer from the hunger of
excessive emptiness. See, I declare that your Circumcelliones are burning,
not with rustling but with headlong flames. If you answer, What is that to
us? why do not you, when you reproach with any one whom you will, not
listen in turn to our answer, We too know nothing of it? If you answer, You
do not prove the fact, why may not the whole word answer you in turn,
Neither do you prove it? Let us agree, therefore, if you please, that you
should not charge us with the guilt of the wicked men whom you consider to
belong to us, and that we should abstain from similar charges against you.
So you will see, by this just agreement, confirmed and ratified, that you
have no charge which you can bring against the seed of Abraham, as found in
all the nations of the earth. But I find without difficulty a grievous
charge to bring against you: Why have you impiously separated yourselves
from the seed of Abraham, which is in all nations of the earth? Against
this charge you certainly have no means whereby you may defend yourselves.
For we each of us clear ourselves of the sins of other men; but this, that
yon do not hold communion with all the nations of the earth, which are
blessed in the seed of Abraham, is a very grievous crime, of which not some
but all of you are guilty.
74. And yet you know, as you prove by your quotation, that the Holy
Spirit descended in such wise, that those who were then filled with it
spake with divers tongues: what was the meaning of that sign and prodigy?
Why then is the Holy Spirit given now in such wise, that no one to whom it
is given speaks with divers tongues, except because that miracle then
prefigured that all nations of the earth should believe, and that thus the
gospel should be found to be in every tongue? Just as it was foretold in
the psalm so long before: "There is no speech nor language where their
voice is not heard." This was said with reference to those men who were
destined, after receiving the Holy Spirit, to speak with every kind of
tongue. But because this passage itself signified that the gospel should be
found hereafter in all nations and languages, and that the body of Christ
should sound forth throughout all the world in every tongue, therefore he
goes on to say, "Their sound is gone out throughout all the earth, and
their words to the ends of the world." Hence it is that the true Church is
hidden from no one. And hence comes that which the Lord Himself says in the
gospel, "A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid."(5) And therefore
David continues in the same psalm, "In the sun hath He placed His
tabernacle," that is, in the open light of day; as we read in the Book of
Kings, "For thou didst it secretly; but I will do this thing before all
Israel, and before the sun."(1) And He Himself is "as a bridegroom coming
out of His chamber, and rejoiceth as a giant to run His race. His going
forth is from the end of heaven:" here you have the coming of the Lord in
the flesh. "And His circuit unto the ends of it:" here you have His
resurrection and ascension. "And there is nothing hid from the heat
thereof:"(2) here you have the coming of the Holy Spirit, whom He sent in
tongues of fire, that He might make manifest the glowing heat of charity,
which he certainly cannot have who does not keep the unity of the Spirit in
the bond of peace with the Church, which is throughout all languages.
75. Next, however, with regard to your statement that there is indeed
one baptism,(3) but that it is consecrated in three several grades, and to
your having distributed the three forms of it to three persons after such
fashion, that you ascribe the water to John, the Holy Spirit to the Lord
Jesus Christ, and, in the third place, the fire to the Comforter sent down
from above,--consider for a moment in how great an error you are involved.
For you were brought to entertain such an opinion simply from the words of
John: "I indeed baptize you with water: but He that cometh after me is
mightier than I: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with
fire."(4) Nor were you willing to take into consideration that the three
things are not attributed to three persons taken one by one,--water to
John, the Holy Spirit to Christ, fire to the Comforter,--but that the three
should rather be referred to two persons--one of them to John, the other
two to our Lord. For neither is it said, I indeed baptize you with water:
but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy
to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost: and the Comforter, who
is to come after Him, He shall baptize you with fire; but "I indeed," He
says, "with water: but He that cometh after me with the Holy Ghost, and
with fire." One he attributes to himself, two to Him that cometh after him.
You see, therefore, how you have been deceived in the number. Listen
further. You said that there was one baptism consecrated in three stages--
water, the Holy Spirit, and fire; and you assigned three persons to the
three stages severally--John to the water, Christ to the Spirit, the
Comforter to the fire. If, therefore, the water of John bears reference to
the same baptism which is commended as being one, it was not right that
those should have been baptized a second time by the command of the Apostle
Paul whom he found to have been baptized by John. For they already had
water, belonging, as you say, to the same baptism; so that it remained that
they should receive the Holy Spirit and fire, because these were wanting in
the baptism of John, that their baptism might be completed, being
consecrated, as you assert, in three stages. But since they were ordered to
be baptized by the authority of an apostle, it is sufficiently made
manifest that that water with which John baptized had no reference to the
baptism of Christ, but belonged to another dispensation suited to the
exigencies of the times.
76. Lastly, when you wished to prove that the Holy Spirit was given by
Christ, and had brought forward as a proof from the gospel, that Jesus on
rising from the dead breathed into the face of His disciples, saying,
"Receive ye the Holy Ghost;"(5) and when you wished to prove that that last
fire which was named in connection with baptism was found in the tongues of
fire which were displayed on the coming of the Holy Ghost, how came it into
your head to say, "And the Comforter Himself came upon the apostles as a
fire burning with rustling flames," as though there were one Holy Spirit
whom He gave by breathing on the face of His disciples, and another who,
after His ascension, came on the apostles? Are we to suppose, therefore,
that there are two Holy Spirits? Who will be found so utterly mad as to
assert this? Christ therefore Himself gave the same Holy Spirit, whether by
breathing on the face of the disciples, or by sending Him down from heaven
on the day of Pentecost, with undoubted commendation of His holy sacrament.
Accordingly it was not that Christ gave the Holy Spirit, and the Comforter
gave the fire, that the saying might be fulfilled, "With the Holy Spirit,
and with fire;" but the same Christ Himself gave the Holy Spirit in both
cases, making it manifest while He was yet on earth by His breathing, and
when He was ascended into heaven by the tongues of flame. For that you may
know that the words of John, "He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost,"
were not fulfilled at the time when He breathed on His disciples face, so
that they should require to be baptized, when the Comforter should come,
not with the Spirit any longer, but with fire, I would have you remember
the most outspoken words of Scripture, and see what the Lord Himself said
to them when He ascended into heaven: "John truly baptized you with water;
but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, whom ye shall receive not
many days hence at Pentecost.(1) What could be plainer than this testimony?
But according to your interpretation, what He should have said was this:
John verily baptized you with water; but ye were baptized with the Holy
Spirit when I breathed on your faces; and next in due order shall ye be
baptized with fire, which ye shall receive not many days hence;--in order
that by this means the three stages should be completed, in which you say
that the one baptism was consecrated. And so it proves to be the case that
you are still ignorant of the meaning of the words, "He shall baptize you
with the Holy Ghost, and with fire;" and you are rash enough to be williing
to teach what you do not know yourselves.
CHAP. 33.--77. PETILIANUS said: "But that I may thoroughly investigate
the baptism in the name of the Trinity, the Lord Christ said to His
apostles: 'Go ye, and baptize the nations, in the name of the Father, and
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things
whatsoever I command you.'(2) Whom do you teach, traditor? Him whom you
condemn? Whom do you teach, traditor? Him whom you slay? Once more, whom do
you teach? Him whom you have made a murderer? How then do you baptize in
the name of the Trinity? You cannot call God your Father. For when the Lord
Christ said, 'Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the
children of God,'(3) you who have not peace of soul cannot have God for
your Father. Or how, again, can you baptize in the name of the Son, who
betray that Son Himself, who do not imitate the Son of God in any of His
sufferings or crosses? Or how, again, can you baptize in the name of the
Holy Ghost, when the Holy Ghost came only on those apostles who were not
guilty of treason? Seeing, therefore, that God is not your Father, neither
are you truly born again with the water of baptism. No one of you is born
perfectly. You in your impiety have neither father nor mother. Seeing,
then, that you are of such a kind, ought I not to baptize you, even though
you wash yourselves a thousand times, after the similitude of the Jews, who
as it were baptize the flesh?"
78. AUGUSTIN answered: certainly you had proposed thoroughly to
investigate the baptism in the name of the Trinity, and you had set us to
listen with much attention; but following, as it would seem, what is the
easiest course to you, how soon have you returned to your customary abuse!
This you carry out with genuine fluency. For you set before yourself what
victims you please, against whom to inveigh with whatsoever bitterness you
please: in the midst of which last latitude of discourse you are driven
into the greatest straits if any one does lint use the little word, Prove
it. For this is what is said to you by the seed of Abraham; and since in
him all nations of the earth are blessed, they care but little when they
are cursed by you. But yet, since you are treating of baptism, which you
consider to be true when it is found in a just man, but false when it is
found in the unjust, see how I too, if I were to investigate baptism in the
name of the Trinity, according to your rule, might say, with great
fullness, as it seems to me, that he has not God for his father who in a
Count has God for his companion,(4) nor believes that any is his Christ,
save him for whose sake he has endured suffering; and that he has not the
Holy Ghost who burned the wretched Africa in so very different a fashion
with tongues of fire. How then can they have baptism, or how can they
administer it in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost? Surely you must now perceive that baptism can exist in an
unrighteous man, and be administered by an unrighteous man, and that no
unrighteous baptism, but such as is just and true,--not because it belongs
to the unrighteous man, but because it is of God. And herein I am uttering
no calumny against you, as you never cease to do, on some pretense or
other, against the whole world; and, what is even more intolerable, you do
not even bring any proof about the very points on which you found your
calumnies. But I know not how this can possibly be endured, because you not
only bring calumnies against holy men about unrighteous men, but you even
bring a charge against the holy baptism itself, which must needs be holy in
any man, however unrighteous he may be, from a comparison with the
infection arising from the sins of wicked men, so that you say that baptism
partakes of the character of him by whom it is possessed, or administered,
or received. Furthermore, if a man partakes of the character of him in
whose company he approaches sacred mysteries, and if the sacraments
themselves partake of the character of the men in whom they are, holy men
may well be satisfied to find consolation in the thought that they only
fare like holy baptism itself in hearing false accusations from your lips.
But it would be well for you to see how you are condemned out of your own
mouths, if both the sober among you are counted as drunken from the
infection of the drunken in your ranks, and the merciful among you become
robbers from the infection of the robbers, and whatever evil is found among
you in the persons of wicked men is perforce shared by those who are not
wicked; and if baptism itself is unclean in all of you who are unclean, and
if it is of different kinds according to the varying character of
uncleanness itself, as it must be if it is perforce of the same character
as the man by whom it is possessed or administered. These suppositions most
undoubtedly are false, and accordingly they in no wise injure us, when you
bring them forward against us without looking back upon yourselves. But
they do injure you, because, when you bring them forward falsely, they do
not fall on us; but since you imagine them to be true, they recoil upon
yourselves.
CHAP. 34.--79. PETILIANUS said: "For if the apostles were allowed to
baptize those whom John had washed with the baptism of repentance, shall it
not likewise be allowed to me to baptize men guilty of sacrilege like
yourselves?"
80. AUGUSTIN answered: Where then is what you said above, that there
was not one baptism of John and another of Christ, but that there was one
baptism, consecrated in three stages, of which three stages John gave the
water, Christ the Spirit, and the Comforter the fire? Why then did the
apostles repeat the water in the case of those to whom John had already
administered water belonging to the one baptism which is consecrated in
three stages? Surely you must see how necessary it is that every one should
understand the meaning of what he is discussing.
CHAP. 35.--81. PETILIANUS said: "Nor indeed will it be possible that
the Holy Spirit should be implanted in the heart of any one by the laying
on of the hands of the priest, unless the water of a pure conscience has
gone before to give him birth."
82. AUGUSTIN answered: In these few words of yours two errors are
involved; and one of them, indeed, has no great bearing on the question
which is being discussed between us, but yet it helps to convict you of
want of skill. For the Holy Spirit came upon a hundred and twenty men,
without the laying on of any person s hands, and again upon Cornelius the
centurion and those who were with him, even before they were baptized.(1)
But the second error in these words of yours entirely overthrows your whole
case. For you say that the water of a pure conscience must necessarily
precede to give new birth, before the Holy Spirit can follow on it.
Accordingly, either all the water consecrated in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is water of a pure conscience, not
for the merits of those by whom it is administered, or by whom it is
received, but in virtue of the stainless merits of Him who instituted this
baptism; or else if only a pure conscience on the part both of the
ministrant and the recipient can produce the water of a pure conscience,
what do you make of those whom you find to have been baptized by men who
bore a conscience stained with as yet undiscovered guilt, especially if
there exist among the said baptized persons any one that should confess
that he at the time when he was baptized had a bad conscience, in that he
might possibly have desired to use that opportunity for the accomplishment
of some sinful act? When, therefore, it shall be made clear to you that
neither the man who administered baptism, nor the man who received it, had
a pure conscience, will you give your judgment that he ought to be baptized
afresh? You will assuredly neither say nor do anything of the sort. The
purity therefore of baptism is entirely unconnected with the purity or
impurity of the conscience either of the giver or the recipient. Will you
therefore dare to say that the deceiver, or the robber, or the oppressor of
the fatherless and widows, or the sunderer of marriages, or the betrayer,
the seller, the divider of the patrimony of other men,(2) was a man of pure
conscience? Or will you further dare to say that those were men of pure
conscience, whom it is hard to imagine wanting in such times, men who made
interest with the man I have described, that they might be baptized, not
for the sake of Christ, nor for the sake of eternal life, but to conciliate
earthly friendships, and to satisfy earthly desires? Further, if you do not
venture to say that these were men of pure conscience, then if you find any
of their number who have been baptized, give to them the water of a pure
conscience, which they as yet have not received; and if you will not do
this, then leave off casting in our teeth a matter which you do not
understand, lest you should be forced to answer in reply to us about a
matter which you know full well.
CHAP. 36.--83. PETILIANUS said: "Which Holy Spirit certainly cannot
come on you, who have not been washed even with the baptism of repentance;
but the water of the traditor, which most truly needs to be repented of,
does but work pollution."
84. AUGUSTIN answered: As a matter of fact, not only do you not prove
us to be traditors, but neither did your fathers prove that our fathers
were guilty of that sin; though, even if that had been proved, the
consequence would have been that they would not be our fathers, according
to your earlier assertion, seeing that we had not followed their deeds: vet
neither should we on their account be severed from the companionship of
unity, and from the seed of Abraham, in which all nations of the earth are
blessed.(1) However, if the water of Christ be one thing, and the water of
the traditor another, because Christ was not a traditor, why should not the
water of Christ be one thing, and the water of a robber another, since
certainly Christ was not a robber? Do you therefore baptize again after
baptism by your robber, and I will baptize again after the traditor, who is
neither mine nor yours; or, if one must believe the documents which are
produced, who is both mine and yours; or, if we are to believe the
communion of the whole world rather than the party of Donatus, who is not
mine, but yours. But, by a better and a sounder judgment, because it is
according to the words of the apostle, every one of us shall bear his own
burden;(2) nor is either that robber yours, if you are not yourselves
robbers; nor does any traditor belong to any one either of us or you, who
is not himself a traditor. And yet we are Catholics, who, following the
spirit of that judgment, do not desert the unity of the Church; but you are
heretics, who, on account of charges, whether true or false, which you have
brought against certain men, are unwilling to maintain Christian charity
with the seed of Abraham.
CHAP. 37.--85. PETILIANUS said: "But that the truth of this may be made
manifest from the apostles, we are taught by their actions, as it is
written: 'It came to pass that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul, having
passed through the upper coasts, came to Ephesus; and finding certain
disciples, he said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye
believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether
there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye
baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily
baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they
should believe on Him which should come after him, that is, on Christ
Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord
Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on
them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were
about twelve.'(3) If, therefore, they were baptized that they might receive
the Holy Ghost, why do not you, if you wish to receive the Holy Ghost, take
measures to obtain a true renewing, after your falsehoods? And if we do ill
in urging this, why do you seek after us? or at any rate, if it is an
offense, condemn Paul in the first instance; the Paul who certainly washed
off what had already existed, whereas we in you give baptism which as yet
does not exist. For you do not, as we have often said before, wash with a
true baptism; but you bring on men an ill repute by your empty name of a
false baptism."
86. AUGUSTIN answered: "We bring no accusation against Paul, who gave
to men the baptism of Christ because they had not the baptism of Christ,
but the baptism of John, according to their own reply; for, being asked,
Unto what were ye baptized? they answered, Unto John's baptism; which has
nothing to do with the baptism of Christ, and is neither a part of it nor a
step towards it. Otherwise, either at that time the water of the baptism of
Christ was renewed a second time, or if the baptism of Christ was then made
perfect by the two waters, the baptism is less perfect which is given now,
because it is not given with the water which was given at the hands of
John. But either one of these opinions it is impious and sacrilegious to
entertain. Therefore Paul gave the baptism of Christ to those who had not
the baptism of Christ, but only the baptism of John.
87. But why the baptism of John, which is not necessary now, was
necessary at that time, I have explained elsewhere; and the question has no
bearing on the point at issue between us at the present time, except so far
as that it may appear that the baptism of John was one thing, the baptism
of Christ another,--just as that baptism was a different thing with which
the apostle says that our fathers were baptized in the cloud and in the
sea, when they passed through the Red Sea under the guidance of Moses.(4)
For the law and the prophets up to the time of John the Baptist had
sacraments which foreshadowed things to come; but the sacraments of our
time bear testimony that that has come already which the former sacraments
foretold should come. John therefore was a foreteller of Christ nearer to
Him in time than all who went before him. And because all the righteous men
and prophets of former times desired to see the fulfillment of what,
through the revelation of the Spirit, they foresaw would come to pass,--
whence also the Lord Himself says, "That many prophets and righteous men
have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and
to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them,"(1)--therefore
it was said of John that he was more than a prophet, and that among all
that were born of women there was none greater than he;(2) because to the
righteous men who went before him it was only granted to foretell the
coming of Christ, but to John it was given both to foretell Him in His
absence and to behold His presence, so that it should be found that to him
was made manifest what the others had desired. And therefore the sacrament
of his baptism is still connected with the foretelling of Christ's coming,
though as of something very soon to be fulfilled, seeing that up to his
time there were still foretellings of the first coming of our Lord, of
which coming we have now announcements, but no longer predictions. But the
Lord, teaching the way of humility, condescended to make use of the
sacraments which He found here in reference to the foretelling of His
coming, not in order to assist the operation of His cleansing, but as an
example for our piety, that so He might show to us with what reverence we
ought to receive those sacraments which bear witness that He is already
come, when He did not disdain to make use of those which foreshadowed His
coming in the future. And John, therefore, though the nearest to Christ in
point of time, and within one year of the same age with Him, yet, while he
was baptizing, went before the way of Christ who was still to come; for
which reason it was said of him, "Behold, I send my messenger before Thy
face, which shall prepare Thy way before Thee."(3) And he himself preached,
saying, "There cometh one mightier than I after me."(4) In like manner,
therefore, the circumcision on the eighth day, which was given to the
patriarchs, foretold our justification, to the putting away of carnal lusts
through the resurrection of our Lord, which took place after the seventh
day, which is the Sabbath-day, on the eighth, that is, the Lord's day,
which fell on the third day after His burial; yet the infant Christ
received the same circumcision of the flesh, with its prophetic
signification. And as the Passover, which was celebrated by the Jews with
the slaying of a lamb, prefigured the passion of our Lord and His departure
from this world to the Father, yet the same Lord celebrated the same
Passover with His disciples, when they reminded Him of it, saying, Where
wilt Thou that we prepare for Thee to eat the Passover?(5) so too He
Himself also received the baptism of John, which formed a part of the
latest foretelling of His coming. But as the Jews' circumcision of the
flesh is one thing, and the ceremony which we observe on the eighth day
after persons are baptized is another;(6) and the Passover which the Jews
still celebrate with the slaying of a lamb is one thing,(7) and that which
we receive in the body and blood of our Lord is another,--so the baptism of
John was one thing, the baptism of Christ is another. For by the former
series of rites the latter were foretold as destined to arrive; by these
latter the others are declared to be fulfilled. And even though Christ
received the others, yet are they not necessary for us, who have received
the Lord Himself who was foretold in them. But when the coming of our Lord
was as yet recent, it was necessary for any one who had received the former
that he should be imbued with the latter also; but it was wholly needless
that any one who had been so imbued should be compelled to go back to the
former rites.
88. Wherefore do not seek to raise confusion out of the baptism of
John, the source and intention of which was either such as I have here set
forth; or if any other better explanation of it can be given, this much
still is clear, that the baptism of John and the baptism of Christ are two
distinct and separate things, and that the former was expressly called the
baptism of John, as is clear both from the answer of those men whose case
yon quoted, and from the words of our Lord Himself, when he says, "The
baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men?"(8) But the latter
is never called the baptism of Caecilianus, or of Donatus, or of Augustin,
or of Petilianus, but the baptism of Christ. For if you think that we are
shameless, because we will not allow that any one should be baptized after
baptism from us, although we see that men were baptized again who had
received the baptism of John, who certainly is incomparably greater than
ourselves, will you maintain that John and Optatus were of equal dignity?
The thing appears ridiculous. And yet I fancy that you do not hold them to
be equals, but consider Optatus the greater of the two. For the apostle
baptized after baptism by John: you venture to baptize no one after baptism
by Optatus. Was it because Optatus was in unity with you? I know not with
what heart a theory like this can be maintained, if the friend of the
Count,(1) who had in the Count a god for his companion, is said to have
been in unity, and the friend of the Bridegroom to have been excluded from
it. But if John was preeminently in unity, and far more excellent and
greater than all of us and all of you, and yet the Apostle Paul baptized
after him, why do you then not baptize after Optatus? Unless indeed it be
that your blindness brings you into such a strait that you should say that
Optatus had the power of giving the Holy Spirit, and that John had not! And
if you do not say this, for fear of being ridiculed for your madness even
by the insane themselves, what answer will you be able to make when you are
asked why men should have required to be baptized after receiving baptism
from John, while no one needs to be baptized after receiving it from
Optatus, unless it be that the former were baptized with the baptism of
John, while, whenever any one is baptized with the baptism of Christ,
whether he be baptized by Paul or by Optatus, there is no difference in the
nature of his baptism, though there is so great a difference between Paul
and Optatus? Return then, O ye transgressors, to a right mind,(2) and do
not seek to weigh the sacraments of God by considerations of the characters
and deeds of men. For the sacraments are holy through Him to whom they
belong; but when taken in hand worthily, they bring reward, when
unworthily, judgment. And although the men are not one who take in hand the
sacrament of God worthily or unworthily, yet that which is taken in hand,
whether worthily or unworthily, is the same; so that it does not become
better or worse in itself, but only turns to the life or death of those who
handle it in either case. And in respect of what you said, that "in those
whom Paul baptized after they had received the baptism of John, he washed
off what had already existed," you certainly would not have said it had you
taken a moment to consider what you were saying. For if the baptism of John
required washing off, it must, beyond all doubt, have had some foulness in
it. Why then should I press you further? Recollect or read, and see whence
John received it, so shall you see against whom you have uttered that
blasphemy; and when you have discovered this, your heart will surely be
beaten, if a rein be not set on your tongue.
89. To come next to what you think you say against us with so much
point: "If we do ill in urging this, why do you seek after us?" cannot you
even yet call to mind that only those are sought after who have perished?
Or is the incapacity for seeing this an element in your ruin? For the sheep
might say to the shepherd with equal absurdity, If I do wrong in straying
from the flock, why do you search after me? not understanding that the very
reason why it is being sought is because it thinks there is no need for
seeking it. But who is there that seeks for you, either through His
Scriptures, or by catholic and conciliatory voices, or by the scourgings of
temporal afflictions, save only Him who dispenses that mercy to you in all
things? We therefore seek you that we may find you; for we love you that
you should have life, with the same intensity with which we hate your
error, that it might be destroyed which seeks to ruin you, so long as it is
not itself involved in your destruction. And would to God that we might
seek you in such a manner as even to find, and be able to say with
rejoicing of each one of you, "He was dead, and is alive again; he was
lost, and is found!"(3)
CHAP. 38.--90. PETILIANUS said: "If you declare that yon hold the
Catholic Church, the word 'catholic' is merely the Greek equivalent for
entire or whole. But it is clear that you are not in the whole, because you
have gone aside into the part."
91. AUGUSTIN answered: I too indeed have attained to a very slight
knowledge of the Greek language, scarcely to be called knowledge at all,
yet I am not shameless in saying that I know that ko'lon means not "one,"
but "the whole;" and that kath' ho'lon means "according to the whole:"
whence the Catholic Church received its name, according to the saying of
the Lord, "It is not for you to know the times, which the Father hath put
in His own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is
come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in
Judea, and in Samaria, and even in the whole earth."(4) Here you have the
origin of the name "Catholic." But you are so bent upon running with your
eyes shut against the mountain which grew out of a small stone, according
to the prophecy of Daniel, and filled the whole earth,(1) that you actually
tell us that we have gone aside into a part, and are not in the whole among
those whose communion is spread throughout the whole earth. But just in the
same way as, supposing you were to say that I was Petilianus, I should not
be able to find any method of refuting you unless I were to laugh at you as
being in jest, or mourn over you as being mad, so in the present case I see
that I have no other choice but this; and since I do not believe that you
are in jest, you see what alternative remains.
CHAP. 39.--92.--PETILIANUS said: "But there is no fellowship of
darkness with light, nor any fellowship of bitterness with the sweet of
honey; there is no fellowship of life with death, of innocence with guilt,
of water with blood; the lees have no fellowship with o? though they are
related to it as being its dregs, but everything that is reprobate will
flow away. It is the very sink of iniquity; according to the saying of
John, They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been
of us, they would no doubt have continued with us.'(2) There is no gold
among their pollution: all that is precious has been purged away. For it is
written, 'As gold is tried in the furnace, so also are the just tried by
the harassing of tribulation.'(3) Cruelty is not a part of gentleness, nor
religion a part of sacrilege; nor can the party of Macarius(4) in any way
be part of us, because he pollutes the likeness of our rite. For the
enemy's line, which fills up an enemy's name, is no part of the force to
which it is opposed; but if it is truly to be called a part, it will find a
suitable motto in the judgment of Solomon, 'Let their part be cut off from
the earth.'"(5)
93. AUGUSTIN answered: What is it but sheer madness to utter these
taunts without proving anything? You look at the tares throughout the
world, and pay no heed to the wheat, although both have been bidden to grow
together throughout the whole of it. You look at the seed sown by the
wicked one, which shall be separated in the time of harvest,(6) and you pay
no heed to the seed of Abraham, in which all nations of the earth shall be
blessed.(7) Just as though you were already a purged mass, and virgin
honey, and refined oil, and pure gold, or rather the very similitude of a
whited wall. For, to say nothing of your other faults, do the drunken form
a portion of the sober, or are the covetous reckoned among the portion of
the wise? If men of gentle temper appropriate the term of light, where
shall the madness of the Circumcelliones be esteemed to be, excepting in
the darkness? Why then is baptism, given by men like these, held valid
among you, and the same baptism of Christ not held valid, by whatsoever men
it may be administered throughout the world? You see, in fact, that you are
separated from the communion of the whole world in so far as this, that you
are not indeed all drunk, nor alI of you covetous, nor all men of violence,
but that you are all heretics, and, in virtue of this, are all impious and
all sacrilegious,
94. But as to your saying that the whole world that rejoices in
Christian communion is the party of Macarius, who with any remnant of
sanity in his brain could make such a statement? But because we say that
you are of the party of Donatus, you therefore seek for a man of whose
party you may say we are; and, being in a great strait, you mention the
name of some obscure person, who, if he is known in Africa, is certainly
unknown in any other quarter of the globe. And therefore hearken to the
answer made to you by all the seed of Abraham from every corner of the
earth: Of that Macarius, to whose party you assert us to belong, we know
absolutely nothing. Can you reply in turn that you know nothing of Donatus?
But even if we were to say that you are the party of Optatus, which of you
can say that he is unacquainted with Optatus, unless in the sense that he
does not know him personally, as perhaps he does not know Donatus either?
But you acknowledge that you rejoice in the name of Donatus, do you also
take any pleasure in the name of Optatus? What then can the name of Donatus
profit you, when all of you alike are polluted by Optatus? What advantage
can you derive from the sobriety of Donatus, when you are defiled by the
drunkenness of the Circumcelliones? What, according to your views, are you
profiled by the innocence of Donatus, when you are stained by the rapacity
of Optatus? For this is your mistake, that you think that the
unrighteousness of a man has more power in infecting his neighbor than the
righteousness of a man has in purifying those around him. Therefore, if two
share in common the sacraments of God, the one a just man, the other an
unrighteous one, but so that neither the former should imitate the
unrighteousness of the latter, nor the latter the righteousness of the
former, you say that the result is not that both are made just, but that
both are made unrighteous; so that also that holy thing, which both receive
in common, becomes unclean and loses its original holiness. When does
unrighteousness find for herself such advocates as these, through whose
madness she is esteemed victorious? How comes it then that, in the midst of
such mistaken perversity, you congratulate yourselves upon the name of
Donatus, when it shows not that Petilianus deserves to be what Donatus is,
but that Donatus is compelled to be what Optatus is? But let the house of
Israel say, "God is my portion for ever;"(1) let the seed of Abraham say in
all nations "The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance."(2) For they know
how to speak through the gospel of the glory of the blessed God. For you,
too, through the sacrament which is in you, like Caiaphas the persecutor of
the Lord, prophesy without being aware of it.(3) For what in Greek is
expressed by the word Maka'rios is in our language simply "Blessed;" and in
this way certainly we are of the party of Macarius, the Blessed One. For
what is more blessed than Christ, of whose party we are, after whom alI the
ends of the earth are called, and to whom they all are turned, and in whose
sight all the countries of the nations worship? Therefore the party of this
Macarius, that is to say, of this Blessed One, feels no apprehension at
your last curse, distorted from the words of Solomon, lest it should perish
from the earth. For what is said by him of the impious you endeavor to
apply to the inheritance of Christ, and you strive to prove that this has
been achieved with inexpressible impiety; for when he was speaking of the
impious, he says, "Let their portion perish from off the earth."(4) But
when you say, with reference to the words of Scripture, "I shall give Thee
the heathen for Thine inheritance,"(5) and" all the ends of the world shall
remember and turn unto the Lord,"(6) that the promise contained in them has
already perished from the earth, you are seeking to turn against the
inheritance of Christ what was foretold about the lot of the impious; but
so long as the inheritance of Christ endures and increases, you are
perishing in saying such things. For you are not in every case prophesying
through the sacrament of God, since in this case you are merely uttering
evil wishes through your own madness. But the prophecy of the true prophets
is more powerful than the evil speaking of the false prophets.
CHAP. 40.--95. PETILIANUS said: "Paul the apostle also bids us, 'Be ye
not unequally yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath
righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with
darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he
that believeth with an infidel?"(7)
96. AUGUSTIN answered: I recognize the words of the apostle; but how
they can help you I cannot see at all, For which of us says that there is
any fellowship between righteousness and unrighteousness, even though the
righteous and the unrighteous, as in the case of Judas and Peter, should be
alike partakers of the sacraments? For from one and the same holy thing
Judas received judgment to himself and Peter salvation, just as you
received the sacrament with Optatus, and, if you were unlike him, were not
therefore partakers in his robberies. Or is robbery not unrighteousness?
Who would be mad enough to assert that? What fellowship was there, then, on
the part of your righteousness with his unrighteousness, when you
approached together to the same altar?
CHAP. 41.--97. PETILIANUS said: "And, again, he taught us that schisms
should not arise, in the following terms: 'Now this I say, that every one
of you saith, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and i of
Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized
in the name of Paul?'"(8)
98. AUGUSTIN answered. Remember all of you who read this, it was
Petilianus who quoted these words from the apostle. For who could have
believed that he would have brought forward words which tell so much for us
against himself?
CHAP. 42.--99. PETILIANUS said: "If Paul uttered these words to the
unlearned and to the righteous, I say this to you who are unrighteous, Is
Christ divided, that you should separate yourselves from the Church?"
100. AUGUSTIN answered: I am afraid lest any one should think that in
this work of mine the writer has made a mistake, and has written the
heading Petilianus said, when he ought to have written Augustin answered.
But I see what your object is: you wished, as it were, to preoccupy the
ground, lest we should bring those words in testimony against you. But what
have you really done, except to cause them to be quoted twice? If,
therefore, you are so much pleased with hearing the words which make
against you, as to render it necessary that they should be repeated, hear,
I pray you, these words as coming from me, Petilianus: Is Christ divided,
that you should separate yourselves from the Church?
CHAP. 43.--101. PETILIANUS said: "Can it be that the traitor Judas hung
himself for you, or did he imbue you with his character, that, following
his deeds, you should seize on the treasures of the Church, and sell for
money to the powers of this world us who are the heirs of Christ?"
102. AUGUSTIN answered: Judas did not die for us, but Christ, to whom
the Church dispersed throughout the world says, "So shall I have wherewith
to answer him that reproacheth me: for I trust in Thy word."(1) When,
therefore, I hear the words of the Lord, saying, "Ye shall be witnesses
unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and even in
the whole earth,"(2) and through the voice of His prophet, "Their sound is
gone out through all the earth, and their words into the ends of the
world,"(3) no bodily admixture of evil ever is able to disturb me, if I
know how to say, "Be surety for Thy servant for good: let not the proud
oppress me."(4) I do not, therefore, concern myself about a vain
calumniation when I have a substantial promise. But if you complain about
matters or places appertaining to the Church, which you used once to hold,
and hold no longer, then the Jews also may say that they are righteous, and
reproach us with unrighteousness, because the Christians now occupy the
place in which of old they impiously reigned. What then is there unfitting,
if, according to a similar will of the Lord, the Catholics now hold the
things which formerly the heretics used to have? For against all such men
as this, that is to say, against all impious and unrighteous men, those
words of the Lord have force, "The kingdom of God shall be taken from you,
and be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof;"(5) or is it
written in vain, "The righteous shall eat of the labors of the impious"?(6)
Wherefore you ought rather to be amazed that you still possess something,
than that there is something which you have lost. But neither need you
wonder even at this, for it is by degrees that the whitened wall falls
down. Yet look back at the followers of Maximianus, see what places they
possessed, and by whose agency and under whose attacks they were driven
from them, and do you venture, if you can, to say that to suffer things
like these is righteousness, while to do them is unrighteousness. In the
first place, because you did the deed, and they suffered them; and
secondly, because, according to the rule of this righteousness, you are
found to be inferior. For they were driven from the ancient palaces by
Catholic emperors acting through judges, while you are not even driven
forth by the mandates of the emperors themselves from the basilicas of
unity. For what reason is this, save that you are of less merit, not only
than the rest of your colleagues, but even than those very men whom you
assuredly condemned as guilty of sacrilege by the mouth of your plenary
Council?
CHAP. 44.--103. PETILIANUS said: "For we, as it is written, when we are
baptized, put on Christ who was betrayed;(7) you, when you are infected,
put on Judas the betrayer."
104. AUGUSTIN answered: I also might say, You when you are infected put
on Optatus the betrayer, the robber, the oppressor, the separater of
husband and wife; but far be it from me that the desire of returning an
evil word should provoke me into any falsehood: for neither do you put on
Optatus, nor we Judas. Therefore, if each one who comes to us shall answer
to our questions that be has been baptized in the name of Optatus, he shall
be baptized in the name of Christ; and if you baptized any that came from
us and said that they had been baptized in the name of the traitor Judas,
in that case we have no fault to find with what you have done. But if they
had been baptized in the name of Christ, do you not see what an error you
commit in thinking that the sacraments of God can undergo change through
any changeableness of human sins, or be polluted by defilement in the life
of any man?
CHAP. 45.--105. PETILIANUS said: "But if these are the parties, the
name of member of a party is no prejudice against us. For there are two
ways, the one narrow, in which we walk; the other is for the impious,
wherein they shall perish. And yet, though the designations be alike, there
is a great difference in the reality, that the way of righteousness should
not be defiled by fellowship in a name. "
106. AUGUSTIN answered: You have been afraid of the comparison of your
numbers with the multitude throughout the world; and therefore, in order to
win praise for the scantiness of your party, you have sought to bring in
the comparison of yourself walking in the narrow path. Would to God that
you had betaken yourself not to its praise, but to the path itself! Truly
you would have seen that there was the same scantiness in the Church of all
nations; but that the righteous are said to be few in comparison with the
multitude of the unrighteous, just as, in comparison with the chaff, there
may be said to be few grains of corn in the most abundant crop, and yet
these very grains of themselves, when brought into a heap, fill the barn.
For the followers of Maximianus themselves will surpass you in this
scantiness of number, if you think that righteousness consists in this, as
well as in the persecution involved in the loss of places which they held.
CHAP, 46.--107. PETILIANUS said: "In the first Psalm David separates
the blessed from the impious, not indeed making them into parties, but
excluding all the impious from holiness. 'Blessed is the man that walketh
not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners.' Let
him who had strayed from the path of righteousness, so that he should
perish, return to it again. 'Nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.'(1)
When he gives this warning, O ye miserable men, why do you sit in that
seat? 'But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in His law doth he
meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers
of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season: his leaf also shall
not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not so:
but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.' He blindeth their
eyes, so that they should not see. 'Therefore the ungodly shall not stand
in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the
Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall
perish.'"(2)
108. AUGUSTIN answered: Who is there in the Scriptures that would not
distinguish between these two classes of men? But you slanderously charge
the corn with the offenses of the chaff; and being yourselves mere chaff,
you boast yourselves to be the only corn. But the true prophets declare
that both these classes have been mingled together throughout the whole
world, that is, throughout the whole corn-field of the Lord, until the
winnowing which is to take place on the day of judgment. But I advise you
to read that first Psalm in the Greek version, and then you will not
venture to reproach the whole world with being of the party of Macarius;
because you will perhaps come to understand of what Macarius there is a
party among all the saints, who throughout all nations are blessed in the
seed of Abraham. For what stands in our language as "Blessed is the man,"
is in Greek Maka'rios anh'r. But that Macarius who offends you, if he is a
bad man, neither belongs to this division, nor is to its prejudice. But if
he is a good man, let him prove his own work, that he may have glory in
himself alone, and not in another.(3)
CHAP. 47.--109. PETILIANUS said: "But the same Psalmist has sung the
praises of our baptism. 'The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. He
maketh me to lie down in the green pastures: He leadeth me beside the still
waters. He restoreth my soul: He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness
for His name's sake. Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of
death,--though the persecutor, he means, should slay me,--'I will fear no
evil: for Thou art with me; Thy rod and Thy staff comfort me.' It was by
this that it conquered Goliath, being armed with the anointing oil. 'Thou
hast prepared a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: Thou
anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over. Surely goodness and mercy
shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of
the Lord for ever.'"(4)
110. AUGUSTIN answered: This psalm speaks of those who receive baptism
aright, and use as holy what is so holy. For those words have no reference
even to Simon Magus, who yet received the same holy baptism; and because he
would not use it in a holy way, he did not therefore pollute it, or show
that in such cases it should be repeated. But since you have made mention
of Goliath. listen to the psalm which treats of Goliath himself, and see
that he is portrayed in a new song; for there it is said, "I will sing a
new song unto Thee, O God: upon a psaltery, and an instrument, of ten
strings, will I sing praise unto Thee."(5) And see whether he belongs to
this song who refuses to communicate with the whole earth. For elsewhere it
is said, "O sing unto the Lord a new song; sing unto the Lord, all the
earth."(6) Therefore the whole earth, with whom you are not in unity, sings
the new song. And these too are the words of the whole earth, "The Lord is
my shepherd, I shall not want," etc. These are not the words of the tares,
though they be endured until the harvest in the same crop. They are not the
words of the chaff, but of the wheat, although they are nourished by one
and the same rain, and are threshed out on the same threshing-floor at the
same time, till they shall be separated the one from the other by the
winnowing at the last day. And yet these both assuredly have the same
baptism, though they are not the same themselves. But if your party also
were the Church of God, you would certainly confess that this psalm has no
application to the infuriated bands of the Circumcelliones. Or if they too
themselves are led through the paths of righteousness, why do you deny that
they are your associates, when you are reproached with them, although, for
the most part, you console yourselves for the scantiness of your section,
not by the rod and staff of the Lord, but by the cudgels of the
Circumcelliones, with which you think that you are safe even against the
Roman laws,--to bring oneself into collision with which is surely nothing
less than to walk through the valley of the shadow of death? But he with
whom the Lord is, fears no evils. Surely, however, you will not venture to
say that the words which are sung in this song belong even to those
infuriated men, and yet you not only acknowledge, but ostentatiously set
forth the fact that they have baptism. These words, therefore, are not used
by any who are not refreshed by the holy water, as are all the righteous
men of God; not by those who are brought to destruction by using it, as was
that magician when baptized by Philip: and yet the water itself in both
kinds of men is the same, and of the same degree of sanctity. These words
are not used except by those who will belong to the right hand; but yet
both sheep and goats feed in the same pasture under one Shepherd, until
they shall be separated, that they may receive their due reward. These
words are not used except by those who, like Peter, receive life from the
table of the Lord, not judgment, as did Judas; and yet the supper was
itself the same to both, but it was not of the same profit to both, because
they were not one. These words are not used except by those who, by being
anointed with the sacred oil, are blessed in spirit also, as was David; not
merely consecrated in the body only, as was Saul: and yet, as they had both
received the same outward sign, it was not the sacrament, but the personal
merit that was different in the two cases. These words are not used except
by those who, with converted heart, receive the cup of the Lord unto
eternal life; not by those who eat and drink damnation to themselves, as
the apostle says:(1) and yet, though they are not one, the cup which they
receive is one, exerting its power on the martyrs that they should obtain a
heavenly reward, not on the Circumcelliones, that they should mark
precipices with death. Remember, therefore, that the characters of bad men
in no wise interfere with the virtue of the sacraments, so that their
holiness should either be destroyed, or even diminished; but that they
injure the unrighteous men themselves, that they should have them as
witnesses of their damnation, not as aids to health. For beyond all doubt
you should have taken into consideration the actual concluding words of
this psalm, and have understood that, on account of those who forsake the
faith after they have been baptized, it cannot be said by all who receive
holy baptism that "I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever:" and
yet, whether they abide in the faith, or whether they have fallen away,
though they themselves are not one, their baptism is one, and though they
themselves are not both holy, yet the baptism in both is holy; because even
apostates, if they return, are not baptized as though they had lost the
sacrament, but undergo humiliation, because they have done a despite to it
which remains in them.
CHAP. 48.--111. PETILIANUS said: "Yet that you should not call
yourselves holy, in the first place, I declare that no one has holiness who
has not led a life of innocence."
112. AUGUSTIN answered: Show us the tribunal where you have been
enthroned as judge, that the whole world should stand for trial before you,
and with what eyes you have inspected and discussed, I do not say the
consciences, but even the acts of all men, that you should say that the
whole world has lost its innocence. He who was carried up as far as the
third heaven says, "Yea, I judge not mine own self;"(2) and do you venture
to pronounce sentence on the whole world, throughout which the inheritance
of Christ is spread abroad? In the next place, if what you have I said
appears to you to be sufficiently certain, I that "no one has holiness who
has not led a life of innocence," I would ask you, if Saul had not the
holiness of the sacrament, what was in him that David reverenced? But if he
had innocence, why did he persecute the innocent? For it was on account of
the sanctity of his anointing that David honored him while alive, and
avenged him after he was dead; and because he cut off so much as a scrap
from his garment, he trembled with a panic-stricken heart. Here you see
that Saul had not innocence, and yet he had holiness,--not the personal
holiness of a holy life (for that no one can have without innocence), but
the holiness of the sacrament of God, which is holy even in unrighteous
men.
CHAP. 49.--113. PETILIANUS said: "For, granting that you faithless ones
are acquainted with the law, without any prejudice to the law itself, I may
say so much as this, the devil knows it too. For in the case of righteous
Job he answered the Lord God concerning the law as though he were himself
righteous, as it is written, "And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou
considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a man
without malice, a true worshipper of God abstaining from every evil; and
still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him,
to destroy him without cause?" And Satan answered the Lord, Skin for skin,
yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. Behold he speaks in
legal phrase, even when he is striving against the law. And a second time
he endeavored thus to tempt the Lord Christ with his discourse, as it is
written, 'The devil taketh Jesus into the holy city, and setteth Him on a
pinnacle of the temple, and saith unto Him, If thou be the Son of God, cast
thyself down: for it is written, He shall give His angels charge Concerning
thee; and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou
dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said unto him, It is written again,
Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God." You know the law, I say, as did the
devil, who is conquered in his endeavors, and blushes in his deeds."
114. AUGUSTIN answered: I might indeed ask of you in what law the words
are written which the devil used when he was uttering calumnies against the
holy man Job, if the position which I am set to prove were this, that you
yourself are unacquainted with the law which you assert the devil to have
known but as this is not the question at issue between us, I pass it by.
But you have endeavored in such sort to prove that the devil is skilled in
the law, as though we maintained that all who know the law are just.
Accordingly, I do not see in what manner you are assisted by what you have
chosen to quote concerning the devil,--unless, indeed, it may be that we
should be thereby reminded how you imitate the devil himself. For as he
brought forward the words of the law against the Author of the law, so you
also out of the words of the law bring accusation against men whom you do
not know, that you may resist the promises of God which are made in that
very self-same law. Then I should be glad if you would tell me in whose
honor do those confessors of yours achieve their martyrdom, when they throw
themselves over precipices,--in honor of Christ, who thrust the devil from
Him when he made a like suggestion, or rather in honor of the devil
himself, who suggested such a deed to Christ? There are two especially vile
and customary deaths resorted to by those who kill themselves,--hanging and
the precipice. You assuredly said in the earlier part of this epistle, "The
traitor hung himself: he left this death to all who are like him" This has
no application whatever to us; for we refuse to reverence with the name of
martyr any who have strangled themselves. With how much greater show of
reason might we say against you, That master of all traitors, the devil,
wished to persuade Christ to throw Himself headlong down, and was repulsed!
What, therefore, must we say of those whom he persuaded with success? What,
indeed, except that they are the enemies of Christ, the friends of the
devil, the disciples of the seducer, the fellow-disciples of the traitor?
For both have learned to bill themselves from the same master,--Judas by
hanging himself, the others by throwing themselves over precipices.
CHAP. 50.--115. PETILIANUS said: "But that we may destroy your
arguments one by one, if you call yourselves by the name of priests, it was
said by the Lord God, through the mouth of His prophet, 'The vengeance of
the Lord is upon the false priests.'"
116. AUGUSTIN answered: Seek rather what you may say with truth, not
whence you may derive abusive words; and what you may teach, not what
reproaches you may cast in our teeth.
CHAP. 51.--117. PETILIANUS said: "If you wretched men claim for
yourselves a seat, as we said before, you assuredly have that one of which
the prophet and psalmist David speaks as being the seat of the scornful(3)
For to you it is rightly left, seeing that the holy cannot sit therein.'
118. AUGUSTIN answered: Here again you do not see that this is no kind
of argument, but empty abuse. For this is what I said a little while ago,
You utter the words of the law, but take no heed against whom you utter
them; just as the devil uttered the words of the law, but failed to
perceive to whom he uttered them. He wished to thrust down our Head, who
was presently to ascend on high; but you wish to reduce to a small fraction
the body of that same Head which is dispersed throughout the entire world.
Certainly you yourself said a little time before that we know the law, and
speak in legal terms, but blush in our deeds. Thus much indeed you say
without a proof of anything; but even though you were to prove it of some
men, you would not be entitled to assert it of these others. However, if
all men throughout all the world were of the character which you most
vainly charge them with, what has the chair done to you of the Roman
Church, in which Peter sat, and which Anastasius fills to-day; or the chair
of the Church of Jerusalem, in which James once sat, and in which John sits
today, with which we are united in catholic unity, and from which you have
severed yourselves by your mad fury? Why do you call the apostolic chair a
seat of the scornful? If it is on account of the men whom you believe to
use the words of the law without performing it, do you find that our Lord
Jesus Christ was moved by the Pharisees, of whom He says, "They say, and do
not," to do any despite to the seat in which they sat? Did He not commend
the seat of Moses, and maintain the honor of the seat, while He convicted
those that sat in it? For He says, "They sit in Moses' seat: all therefore
whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after
their works: for they say, and do not."(1) If you were to think of these
things, you would not, on account of men whom you calumniate, do despite to
the apostolic seat, in which you have no share. But what else is conduct
like yours but ignorance of what to say, combined with want of power to
abstain from evil-speaking?
CHAP. 52.--119. PETILIANUS said: "If you suppose that you can offer
sacrifice, God Himself thus speaks of you as most abandoned sinners: 'The
wicked man,' He says, 'that sacrificeth a calf is as if he cut off a dog's
neck; and he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood.'(2)
Recognize herein your sacrifice, who have already poured out human blood.
And again He says, 'Their sacrifices shall be unto them as the bread of
mourners; all that eat thereof shall be polluted.'"(3)
120. AUGUSTIN answered: We say that in the case of every man the
sacrifice that is offered partakes of the character of him who approaches
to offer it, or approaches to partake of it; and that those eat of the
sacrifices of such men. who in approaching to them partake of the character
of those who offer them. Therefore, if a bad man offer sacrifice to God,
and a good man receive it at his hands, the sacrifice is to each man of
such character as he himself has shown himself to be, since we find it also
written that "unto the pure all things are pure."(4) In accordance with
this true and catholic judgment, you too are free from pollution by the
sacrifice of Optatus, if you disapproved of his deeds. For certainly his
bread was the bread of mourners, seeing that all Africa was mourning under
his iniquities. But the evil involved in the schism of all your party makes
this bread of mourners common to you all. For, according to the judgment of
your Council, Felicianus of Musti was a shedder of man's blood. For you
said, in condemning them,(5) "Their feet are swift to shed blood."(6) See
therefore what kind of sacrifice he offers whom you hold to be a priest,
when you have yourselves convicted him of sacrilege. And if you think that
this is in no way to your prejudice, I would ask you how the emptiness of
your calumnies can be to the prejudice of the whole world?
CHAP. 53.--121. PETILIANUS Said: "If you make prayer to God, or utter
supplication, it profits you absolutely nothing whatsoever. For your blood-
stained conscience makes your feeble prayers of no effect; because the Lord
God regards purity of conscience more than the words of supplication,
according to the saying of the Lord Christ, 'Not every one that saith unto
me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth
the will of my Father which is in heaven.'(7) The will of God
unquestionably is good, for therefore we pray as follows in the holy
prayer, 'Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven,'(8) that, as His
will is good, so it may confer on us whatever may be good. You therefore do
not do the will of God, because you do what is evil every day."
122. AUGUSTIN answered: If we on our side were to utter against you all
that you assert against us, would not any one who heard us consider that we
were rather insane litigants than Christian disputants, if he himself were
in his senses? We do not, therefore, render for railing. For it is not
fitting that the servant of the Lord should strive; but he should be gentle
unto all men, willing to learn, in meekness instructing those that oppose
themselves.(1) If, therefore, we reproach you with those who daily do what
is evil among you, we are guilty of striving unbefittingly, accusing one
for the sins of another. But if we admonish you, that as you are unwilling
that these things should be brought against yourselves, so you should
abstain from bringing against us the sins of other men, we then in meekness
are instructing you, solely in the hope that some time you will return to a
better mind.
CHAP. 54.--123. PETILIANUS said: "But if it should so happen, though
whether it be so I cannot say, that you cast out devils, neither will this
in you do any good; because the devils themselves yield neither to your
faith nor to your merits, but are driven out in the name of the Lord Jesus
Christ."
124. AUGUSTIN answered: God be thanked that you have at length
confessed that the invocation of the name of Christ may be of profit for
the salvation of others, even though it be invoked by sinners! Hence,
therefore, you may understand that when the name of Christ is invoked, the
sins of one man do not stand in the way of the salvation of another. But to
determine in what manner we invoke the name of Christ, we require not your
judgment, but the judgment of Christ Himself who is invoked by us; for He
alone can know in what spirit He is invoked. Yet from His own words we are
assured that He is invoked to their salvation by all nations, who are
blessed in the seed of Abraham.
CHAP. 55.--125. PETILIANUS said: "Even though you do very virtuous
actions, and perform miraculous works, yet on account of your wickedness
the Lord does not know you; even so, according to the words of the Lord
Himself, 'Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not
prophesied in Thy name? and in Thy name have cast out devils? and in Thy
name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never
knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity.'"(2)
126. AUGUSTIN answered: We acknowledge the word of the Lord. Hence also
the apostle says, "Though I have all faith, so that I could remove
mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing."(3) Here therefore we must
inquire who it is that has charity: you will find that it is no one else
but those who are lovers of unity. For as to the driving out of devils, and
as to the working of miracles, seeing that very many do not do such things
who yet belong to the kingdom of God, and very many do them who do not
belong to it, neither our party nor your party have any cause for boasting,
if any of them chance to have this power, since the Lord did not think it
right that even the apostles, who could truly do such things both to profit
and salvation, should boast in things like this, when He says to them, "In
this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather
rejoice, because your names are written in heaven."(4) Wherefore all those
things which you have advanced from the writings of the gospel I also might
repeat to you, if I saw you working the powerful acts of signs and
miracles; and so might you repeat them to me, if you saw me doing things of
a like sort. Let us not, therefore, say one to another what may equally be
said on the other side as well; and, putting aside all quibbles, since we
are inquiring where the Church of Christ is to be found, let us listen to
the words of Christ Himself, who redeemed it with His own blood: "Ye shall
be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria,
and even in the whole earth."(5) You see then who it is with whom a man
refuses to communicate who will not communicate with this Church, which is
spread throughout all the world, if at least you hear whose words these
are. For what is a greater proof of madness than to hold communion with the
sacraments of the Lord, and to refuse to hold communion with the words of
the Lord? Such men at any rate are likely to say, In Thy name have we eaten
and drunken, and to hear the words, "I never knew you,"(6) seeing that they
eat His body and drink His blood in the sacrament, and do not recognize in
the gospel His members which are spread abroad throughout the earth, and
therefore are not themselves counted among them in the judgment.
CHAP. 56.--127. PETILIANUS said: "But even if, as you yourselves
suppose, you are following tile law of the Lord in purity, let us
nevertheless consider the question of the most holy law itself in a legal
form. The Apostle Paul says, 'The law is good, if a man use it
lawfully.'(7) What then does the law say? 'Thou shalt not kill.' What Cain
the murderer did once, you have often done in slaying your brethren."
128. AUGUSTIN answered: We do not wish to be like you: for there are
not wanting words which might be uttered, as you too utter these; and known
also, for you do not know these; and set forth in the conduct of a life, as
these are not set forth by you.
CHAP. 57.--129. PETILIANUS said: "It is written, 'Thou shalt not commit
adultery.' Each one of you, even though he be chaste in his body, yet in
spirit is an adulterer, because he pollutes his holiness."
130. AUGUSTIN answered: These words also might be spoken with truth
against certain both of our number and of yours; but if their deeds are
condemned by us and you alike, they belong to neither us nor you. But you
wish that what you say against certain men, without proving it even in
their especial case, should be taken just as if you had established it,--
not in the case of some who have fallen away from the seed of Abraham, but
in reference to all the nations of the earth who are blessed in the seed of
Abraham.
CHAP. 58.--131. PETILIANUS said: "It is written, 'Thou shalt not bear
false witness against thy neighbor.' When you falsely declare to the kings
of this world that we hold your opinions, do you not make up a falsehood?"
132. AUGUSTIN answered: If those are not our opinions which you hold,
neither were they your opinions which you received from the followers of
Maximianus. But if they were therefore yours, because they were guilty of a
sacrilegious schism in not communicating with the party of Donatus, take
heed what ground you occupy, and with whose inheritance you refuse
communion, and consider what answer you can make, not to the kings of this
world, but to Christ your King. Of Him it is said, "He shall have dominion
also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth."(1)
From what river does it mean, save that where He was baptized, and where
the dove descended on Him, that mighty token of charity and unity? But you
refuse communion with this unity, and occupy as yet the place of unity; and
you bring us into disfavor with the kings of this world in making use of
the edicts of the proconsul to expel your schismatics from the place of the
party of Donatus. These are not mere words flying at random through the
empty void: the men are still alive, the states bear witness to the fact,
the archives of the proconsuls and of the several towns are quoted in
evidence of it. Let then the voice of calumny be at length silent, which
would bring up against the whole earth the kings of this world, through
whose proconsuls you, yourselves a fragment, would not spare the fragment
which was separated from you. When then we say that you hold our opinions,
we are not shown to be bearing false witness, unless you can show that we
are not in the Church of Christ, which indeed you never cease alleging, but
never will be able to establish; nay, in real truth, when you say this, you
are bringing a charge of false witness no longer against us, but against
the Lord Himself. For we are in the Church which was foretold by His own
testimony, and where He bore witness to His witnesses, saying, 'Ye shall be
witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and
even in the whole earth." But you show yourselves to be false witnesses not
only from this, that you resist this truth, but also in the very trial in
which you joined issue with the schism of Maximianus. For if you were
acting according to the law of Christ, how much more consistently do
certain Christian emperors frame ordinances in accordance with it, if even
pagan proconsuls can follow its behests in passing judgment? But if you
thought that even the laws of an earthly empire were to be summoned to your
aid, we do not blame you for this. It is what Paul did when he bore witness
before his adversaries that he was a Roman citizen.(2) But I would ask by
what earthly laws it is ordained that the followers of Maximianus should be
driven from their place? You will find no law whatever to this effect. But,
in point of fact, you have chosen to expel them under laws which have been
passed against heretics, and against yourselves among their number. You, as
though by superior strength, have prevailed against the weak. Whence they,
being wholly powerless, say that they are innocent, like the wolf in the
power of the lion. Yet surely you could not use laws which were passed
against yourselves as instruments against others, except by the aid of
false witness. For if those laws are founded on truth, then do you come
down from the position which you occupy; but if on falsehood, why did you
use them to drive others from the Church? But how if they both are founded
on truth, and could not be used by you for the expulsion of others except
with the aid of falsehood? For that the judges might submit to their
authority, they were willing to expel heretics from the Church, from which
they ought first to have expelled yourselves; but you declared yourselves
to be Catholics, that you might escape the severity of the laws which you
employed to oppress others. It is for you to determine what you appear to
yourselves among yourselves; at any rate, under those laws you are not
Catholics. Why then have you either made them false, if they are true, by
your false witness, or made use of them, if they are false, for the
oppression of others?
CHAP. 59.--133. PETILIANUS said: "It is written, 'Thou shalt not covet
anything that is thy neighbor's.'(1) You plunder what is ours, that you may
have it for your own."
134. AUGUSTIN answered: All things of which unity was in possession
belong to none other than ourselves, who remain in unity, not in accordance
with the calumnies of men, but with the words of Christ, in whom all the
nations of the whole earth are blessed. Nor do we separate ourselves from
the society of the wheat, on account of the unrighteous men whom we cannot
separate from the wheat of the Lord before the winnowing at the judgment;
and if there are any things which you who are cut off begin already to
possess, we do not, because the Lord has given to us what has been taken
away from you, therefore covet our neighbors' goods, seeing that they have
been made ours by the authority of Him to whom all things belong; and they
are rightly ours, for you were wont to use them for purposes of schism, but
we use them for the promotion of unity. Otherwise your party might reproach
even the first people of God with coveting their neighbors' goods, seeing
that they were driven forth before their face by the power of God, because
they used the land amiss; and the Jews in turn themselves, from whom the
kingdom was taken away, according to the words of the Lord, and given to a
nation bringing forth the fruits thereof,(2) may bring a charge against
that nation, of coveting their neighbors' goods, because the Church of
Christ is in possession where the persecutors of Christ were wont to reign.
And, after all, when it has been said to yourselves, You are coveting the
goods of other men, because you have driven out from the basilicas the
followers of Maximianus. you are at a loss to find any answer that you can
make.
CHAP. 60.--135. PETILIANUS said: "Under what law, then, do you make out
that you are Christians, seeing that you do what is contrary to the law?"
136. AUGUSTIN answered: You are anxious for strife, and not for
argument.
CHAP. 61.--137. PETILIANUS said: "But the Lord Christ says, 'Whosoever
shall do and teach them, the same shall be called the greatest in the
kingdom of heaven.' But He condemns you wretched men as follows: 'Whosoever
shall break one of these commandments, he shalt be called the least in the
kingdom of heaven.'"
138. AUGUSTIN answered: When you happen to quote the testimony of
Scripture as other than it really is, and it does not bear on the question
which is at issue between us, I am not greatly concerned; but when it
interferes with the matter on hand, unless it is quoted truly, then I think
that you have no right to find fault if I remind you how the passage really
stands. For you must be aware that the verse which you quoted is not as you
quoted it, but rather thus: "Whosoever shall break one of these least
commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the
kingdom of heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be
called great in the kingdom of heaven." And immediately He continues, "For
I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the
righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into
the kingdom of heaven."(3) For elsewhere He shows and proves of the
Pharisees that they say and do not. It is these, therefore, to whom He is
referring also here, when He said, "Whosoever shall break one of these
commandments, and shall teach men so,"--that is, shall teach in words what
he has violated in deeds; whose righteousness He says that our
righteousness must excel, in that we must both keep the commandments and
teach men so. And yet not even on account of those Pharisees, with whom you
compare us,--not from any motives of prudence, but from malice,--did our
Lord enjoin that the seat of Moses should be deserted, which seat He
doubtless meant to be a figure of His own; for He said indeed that they who
sat in Moses' seat were ever saying and not doing, but warns the people to
do what they say, and not to do what they do,(4) lest the chair, with all
its holiness, should be deserted, and the unity of the flock divided
through the faithlessness of the shepherds.
CHAP. 62.--139. PETILIANUS said: "And again it is written, 'Every sin
which a man shall sin is without the body; but he that sinneth in the Holy
Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the
world to come.'"
140. AUGUSTIN answered: This too is not written as you have quoted it,
and see how far it has led you astray. The apostle, writing to the
Corinthians, says, "Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he
that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body."(1) But this is
one thing, and that is another which the Lord said in the gospel: "All
manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but whosoever
speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in
this world, neither in the world to come."(2) But you have begun a sentence
from the writing of the apostle, and ended it as though it were one from
the gospel, which I fancy you have done not with any intention to deceive,
but through mistake; for neither passage has any bearing on the matter in
hand. And why you have said this, and in what sense you have said it, I am
wholly unable to perceive, unless it be that, whereas you had said above
that all were condemned by the Lord who had broken any one of His
commandments, you have considered since how many there are in your party
who break not one but many of them; and lest an objection should be brought
against you on that score, you have sought, by way of surpassing the
difficulty, to bring in a distinction of sins, whereby it might be seen
that it is one thing to break a commandment in respect of which pardon may
easily be obtained, another thing to sin against the Holy Ghost, which
shall receive no forgiveness, either in this world or in the world to come.
In your dread, therefore, of infection from sin, you were unwilling to pass
this over in silence; and again, in your dread of a question too deep for
your powers, you wish to touch cursorily on it in passing, in such a state
of agitation, that, just as men who are setting about a task in haste, and
consequent confusion, are wont to fasten their dress or shoes awry, so you
have not thought fit either to see what belongs to what, or in what context
or what sense the passage which you quote occurs. But what is the nature of
that sin which shall not be forgiven, either in this world or in the world
to come, you are so far from knowing, that, though you believe that we are
actually living in it, you yet promise us forgiveness of it through your
baptism. And yet how could this be possible, if the sin be of such a nature
that it cannot be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come?
CHAP. 63.--141. PETILIANUS said: "But wherein do you fulfill the
commandments of God? The Lord Christ said, 'Blessed are the poor in spirit;
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.' But you by your malice in persecution
breathe forth the riches of madness."
142. AUGUSTIN answered: Address that rather to your own
Circumcelliones.
CHAP. 64.--143. PETILIANUS said: "'Blessed are the meek: for they shall
inherit the earth.' You therefore, not being meek, have lost both heaven
and earth alike."
144. AUGUSTIN answered: Again and again you may hear the Lord saying,
"Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in
Samaria, and even in the whole earth."(3) How is it, then, that those men
have not lost heaven and earth, who, in order to avoid communicating with
all the nations of the earth, despise the words of Him that sitteth in
heaven? For, in proof of your meekness, it is not your words but the
cudgels of the Circumcelliones which should be examined. You will say, What
has that to do with us? Just as though we were making the remark with any
other object except to extract that answer from you. For the reason that
your schism is a valid charge against you is that you do not allow that you
are chargeable with another's sin, whereas you have separated from us for
no other reason but that you charge us with the sins of other men.
CHAP. 65.--145. PETILIANUS said: "'Blessed are they that mourn: for
they shall be comforted.' You, our butchers, are the cause of mourning in
others: you do not mourn yourselves."
146. AUGUSTIN answered: Consider for a short space to how many, and
with what intensity. the cry of "Praises be to God," proceeding from your
armed men, has caused others to mourn.(4) Do you say again, What is that to
us? Then I too will rejoin again m your own words, What is that to us? What
is it to all the nations of the earth? What is it to those who praise the
name of the Lord from the rising of the sun to the setting of the same?
What is it to all the earth, which sings a new song? What is it to the seed
of Abraham, in which all the nations of the earth are blessed?(5) And so
the sacrilege of your schism is chargeable on you, just because the evil
deeds of your companions are not chargeable on you; and because you are
from this that the deeds of those on whose account you separated from the
world, even if you proved your charges to be true, do not involve the world
in sin.
CHAP. 66.--147. PETILIANUS said: "'Blessed are they which do hunger and
thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.' To you it seems to
be righteousness that you thirst after our blood."
148. AUGUSTIN answered: What shall I say unto thee, O man, except that
thou art calumnious? The unity of Christ, indeed, is hungering and
thirsting after all of you; and I would that it might swallow you up, for
then would you be no longer heretics.
CHAP. 67.--149. PETILIANUS said: "'Blessed are the merciful: for they
shall obtain mercy.' But how shall I call you merciful when you inflict
punishment on the righteous? Shall not rather call you a most unrighteous
communion, so long as you pollute souls?"
150. AUGUSTIN answered: You have proved neither point,--neither that
you yourselves are righteous, nor that we inflict punishment on even the
unrighteous; and yet, even as false flattery is generally cruel, so just
correction is ever merciful. For whence is that which you do not
understand: "Let the righteous smite me, it shall be a kindness; and let
him reprove me"? For while he says this of the severity of merciful
correction, the Psalmist immediately went on to say of the gentleness of
destructive flattery, "But the oil of sinners shall not break my head."(1)
Do you therefore consider whither you are called, and from what you are
summoned away. For how do you know what feelings he entertains towards you
whom you suppose to be cruel? But whatever be his feelings, every one must
bear his own burden both with us and with you. But I would have you cast
away the burden of schism which you all of you are bearing, that you may
bear your good burdens in unity; and I would bid you mercifully correct, if
you should have the power, all those who are bearing evil burdens; and, if
this be beyond your power, I would bid you bear with them in peace.
CHAP. 68.--151. PETILIANUS said: "'Blessed are the pure in heart: for
they shall see God.' When will you see God, who are possessed with
blindness in the impure malice of your hearts?"
152. AUGUSTIN answered: Wherefore say you this? Can it be that we
reproach all nations with the dark and hidden things which are declared by
men, and do not choose to understand the manifest sayings which God spake
in olden time of all the nations of the earth? This is indeed great
blindness of heart; and if you do not recognize it in yourselves, that is
even greater blindness.
CHAP. 69.--153. PETILIANUS said: "'Blessed are the peacemakers; for
they shall be called the children of God.'(2) You make a pretence of peace
by your wickedness, and seek unity by war."
154. AUGUSTIN answered: We do not make a pretense of peace by
wickedness, but we preach peace out of the gospel; and if you were at peace
with it, you would be at peace also with us. The risen Lord, when
presenting Himself to the disciples, not only that they should gaze on Him
with their eyes, but also that they should handle Him with their hands,
began His discourse to them with the words, "Peace be unto you." And how
this peace itself was to be maintained, He disclosed to them in the words
which followed. For "then opened He their understanding, that they might
understand the Scriptures, and said unto them, Thus is it written, and thus
it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; and
that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among
all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."(3) If you will keep peace with these
words, you will not be at variance with us. For if we seek unity by war,
our war could not be praised in more glorious terms, seeing that it is
written, "Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself."(4) And again it is
written, "No man ever yet hated his own flesh."(5) And yet the flesh
lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh.(6) But if no
man ever yet hated his own flesh, and yet a man lusteth against his own
flesh, here you have unity sought by war, that the body, being subject to
correction, may be brought under submission. But what the spirit does
against the flesh, waging war with it, not in hatred but in love, this
those who are spiritual do against those who are carnal, that they may do
towards them what they do towards themselves, because they love their
neighbors as neighbors indeed. But the war which the spiritual wage is that
correction which is in love: their sword is the word of God. To such a war
they are aroused by the trumpet of the apostle sounding with a mighty
force: "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove,
rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering and doctrine."(1) See then that we
act not with the sword, but with the word. But you answer what is not true,
while you accuse us falsely. You do not correct your own faults, and you
bring against us those of other men. Christ bears true witness concerning
the nations of the earth; you, in opposition to Christ, bear false witness
against the nations of the earth. If we were to believe you rather than
Christ, you would call us peacemakers; because we believe Christ rather
than you, we are said to make a pretense of peace by our wickedness. And
while you say and do such things as this, you have the further impudence to
quote the words, "Blessed are the peacemakers; for they shall be called the
children of God."
CHAP. 70.--155. PETILIANUS said: "Though the Apostle Paul says, 'I
therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you, brethren, that ye walk
worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and
meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavoring
to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.'"(2)
156. AUGUSTIN answered: If you would not only say these words, but
hearken to them as well, you would put up even with known evils for the
sake of peace, instead of inventing new ones for the sake of quarreling, if
it were only because you subsequently learned, for the sake of the peace of
Donatus, to put up with the most flagrant and notorious wickedness of
Optatus. What madness is this that you display? Those who are known are
borne with, that a fragment may not be further split up; those of whom
nothing is known are defamed, that they themselves may not remain in the
undivided whole.
CHAP. 71.--157. PETILIANUS said: "To you the prophet says, 'Peace,
peace; and where is there peace?'"(3)
158. AUGUSTIN answered: it is you that say this to us, not the prophet.
We therefore answer you: If you ask where peace is to be found, open your
eyes, and see of whom it is said, "He maketh wars to cease in all the
world."(4) If you ask where peace is to be found, open your eyes to see
that city which cannot be hidden, because it is built upon a hill; open
your eyes to see the mountain itself, and let Daniel show it to you,
growing out of a small stone, and filling the whole earth.(5) But when the
prophet says to you, "Peace, peace; and where is there peace?" what will
you show? Will you show the party of Donatus, unknown to the countless
nations to whom Christ is known? It is surely not the city which cannot be
hid; and whence is this, except that it is not founded on the mountain?
"For He is our peace, who hath made both one,"(6)--not Donatus, who has
made one into two.
CHAP. 72.--159. PETILIANUS said: "'Blessed are they which are
persecuted for righteousness' sake; for theirs is the kingdom of
heaven.'(7) You are not blessed; but you make martyrs to be blessed, with
whose souls the heavens are filled, and the earth has flourished with their
memory. You therefore do not honor them yourselves, but you provide us with
objects of honor."
160. AUGUSTIN answered: The plain fact is, that if it had not been
said, "Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake," but
had been said instead, Blessed are they who throw themselves over
precipices, then heaven would have been filled with your martyrs. Of a
truth we see many flowers on the earth blooming from their bodies; but, as
the saying goes, the flower is dust and ashes.
CHAP. 73.--161. PETILIANUS said: "Since then you are not blessed by
falsifying the commands of God, the Lord Christ condemns you by His divine
decrees: 'Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up
the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither
suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and
Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte;
and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than
yourselves. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay
tithe of mint, and anise, and cummin, and have omitted the weightier
matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have
done, and not to leave the other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain at a
gnat, and swallow a camel. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful
outwardly, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full
of hypocrisy and iniquity.'"(8)
162. AUGUSTIN answered: Tell me whether you have said anything which
may not equally be said against you in turn by any slanderous and evil-
speaking tongue. But from what has been said by me before, any one who
wishes may find out that these things may be said against you, not by way
of empty abuse, but with the support of truthful testimony. As, however,
the opportunity is presented to us we must not pass this by. There is no
doubt that to the ancient people of God circumcision stood in the place of
baptism. I ask, therefore, putting the case that the Pharisees against whom
those words you quote are spoken, had made some proselyte, who, if he were
to imitate them, would, as it is said, become twofold more the child of
hell than themselves, supposing that he were to be converted, and desire to
imitate Simeon, or Zacharias, or Nathanael, would it be necessary that he
should be circumcised again by them? And if it is absurd to put this case
why, although in empty fashion and with empty sounds you compare us to men
like this, do you nevertheless baptize after us? But if you are really men
like this, how much better and how much more in accordance with truth do we
act in not baptizing after you, as neither was it right that those whom I
have mentioned should be circumcised after the worst of Pharisees!
Furthermore, when such men sit in the seat of Moses, for which the Lord
preserved its due honor, why do you blaspheme the apostolic chair on
account of men whom, justly or unjustly, you compare with these?
CHAP. 74.--163. PETILIANUS said: "But these things do not alarm us
Christians; for of the evil deeds which you are destined to commit we have
before a warning given us by the Lord Christ. 'Behold,' He says, 'I send
you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves.'(1) You fill up the measure of
the madness of wolves, who either lay or are preparing to lay snares
against the Churches in precisely the same way in which wolves, with their
mouths wide open against the fold, even with destructive eagerness, breathe
forth panting anger from their jaws, suffused with blood."
164. AUGUSTIN answered: I should be glad to utter the same sentiment
against you, but not in the words which you have used: they are too
inappropriate, or rather mad. But what was required was, that you should
show that we were wolves and that you were sheep, not by the emptiest of
evil-speaking, but by some distinct proofs. For when I too have said, We
are sheep, and you are wolves, do you think that there is any difference
caused by the fact that you express the idea in swelling words? But listen
whilst I prove what I assert. For the Lord says in the gospel, as you know
full well, whether you please it or not, "My sheep hear my voice, and
follow me."(2) There are many sayings of the Lord on different subjects;
but supposing, for example, that any One were in doubt whether the same
Lord had risen in the body, and His words were to be quoted where He says,
"Handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me
have;"--if even after this he should be unwilling to acquiesce in the
belief that His body had risen from the dead, surely such a man could not
be reckoned among the sheep of the Lord, because he would not hear His
voice. And so too now, when the question between us is, Where is the
Church? whilst we quote the words that follow in the same passage of the
gospel, where, after His resurrection, He gave His body even to be handled
by those who were in doubt, in which He showed the future wide extent of
the Church, saying, "Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to
suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; and that repentance and
remission of sins should be preached in His name throughout all nations,
beginning at Jerusalem;"(3) whereas you will not communicate with all
nations, in whom these words have been fulfilled, how are you the sheep of
this Shepherd, whose words you not only do not obey when you have heard
them, but even fight against them? And so we show to you from this that you
are not sheep. But listen further whence we show you that, on the contrary,
you are wolves. For necessarily, when it is shown by His own words where
the Church is to be found, it is also clear where we must look for the fold
of Christ. Whenever, therefore, any sheep separate themselves from this
fold, which is expressly pointed out and shown to us by the unmistakeable
declaration of the Lord,--and that, I will not say because of charges
falsely brought, but on account of charges brought, as no one can deny,
with great uncertainty against their fellow-men, and consequently slay
those sheep which they have torn and alienated from the life of unity and
Christian love--is it not evident that they are ravening wolves? But it
will be said that these very men themselves praise and preach the Lord
Christ. They are therefore those of whom He says Himself, "They come unto
you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. By their
fruits ye shall know them."(1) The sheep's clothing is seen in the praises
of Christ; the fruits of their wolfish nature in their slanderous teeth.
CHAP. 75.--165. PETILIANUS said: "O wretched traditors! Thus indeed it
was fitting that Scripture should be fulfilled. But in you I grieve for
this, that you have shown yourselves worthy to fulfill the part of
wickedness."
166. AUGUSTIN answered: I might rather say, O wretched traditors! if I
were minded, or rather if justice urged me to cast up against all of you
the deeds of some among your number. But as regards what hears on all of
you, O wretched heretics, I on my part will quote the remainder of your
words; for it is written, "There must be also heresies among you, that they
which are approved may be made manifest among you."(2) Therefore "it was
fitting thus that Scripture should be fulfilled. But in you I grieve for
this, that you have shown yourselves worthy to fulfill the part of
wickedness."
CHAP. 76.--167. PETILIANUS said: "But to us the Lord Christ, in
opposition to your deadly commands, commanded simple patience and
harmlessness. For what says He? 'A new commandment I give unto you, That ye
love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.' And
again, 'By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have
love one to another.'"(3)
168. AUGUSTIN answered: If you did not transfer these words, so widely
differing from your character, to the surface of your talk, how could you
be covering yourselves with sheep's clothing?
CHAP. 77.--169. PETILIANUS said: "Paul also, the apostle, whilst he was
suffering fearful persecutions at the hands of all nations, endured even
more grievous troubles at the hands of false brethren, as he bears witness
of himself, being oftentimes afflicted: 'In perils by the heathen, in
perils by mine own countrymen, in perils among false brethren.'(4) And
again he says, 'Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.'(5)
When, therefore, false brethren like yourselves assault us, we imitate the
patience of our master Paul under our dangers."
170. AUGUSTIN answered: Certainly those of whom you speak are false
brethren, of whom the apostle thus complains in another place, where he is
extolling the natural sincerity of Timothy: "I have no man," he says,
"like-minded, who will naturally care for your state. For all seek their
own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's."(6) Undoubtedly he was
speaking of those who were with him at the time when he was writing that
epistle; for it could not be that all Christians in every quarter of the
earth were seeking their own, and not the things which were Jesus Christ's.
It was of those, therefore, as I said, who were with him at the time when
he was writing the words which you have quoted, that he uttered this
lamentation. For who else was it to whom he referred, when he says in
another place, "Without were fightings, within were fears,"(7) except those
whom he feared all the more intensely because they were within? If,
therefore, you would imitate Paul, you would be tolerant of false brethren
within, not a slanderer of the innocent without.
CHAP. 78.--171. PETILIANUS said: "For what kind of faith is that which
is in you which is devoid of charity? when Paul himself says, 'Though I
speak with the tongues of men, and have the knowledge of angels, and have
not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And
though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all
knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains,
and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to
feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not
charity, it profiteth me nothing.'"
172. AUGUSTIN answered: This is what I said just now, that you were
desirous to be clad in sheep's clothing, that, if possible, the sheep might
feel your bite before it had any consciousness of your approach. Is it not
that praise of charity in which you indulge that commonly proves your
calumny in the clearest light of truth? Will you bring it about that those
arms shall be no longer ours, because you endeavor to appropriate them
first? Furthermore, these arms are endowed with life: from whatever quarter
they are launched, they recognize whom they should destroy. If they have
been sent forth from our hands, they will fix themselves in you; if they
are aimed by you, they recoil upon yourselves. For in these apostolic
words, which commend the excellence of charity, we are wont to show to you
how profitless it is to man that he should be in possession of faith or of
the sacraments, when he has not charity, that, when you come to Catholic
unity, you may understand what it is that is conferred on you, and how
great a thing it is of which you were at least to some extent in want; for
Christian charity cannot be preserved except in the unity of the Church:
and that so you may see that without it you are nothing, even though you
may be in possession of baptism and faith, and through this latter may be
able even to remove mountains. But if this is your opinion as well, let us
not repudiate and reject in you either the sacraments of God which we know,
or faith itself, but let us hold fast charity, without which we are nothing
even with the sacraments and with faith. But we hold fast charity if we
cling to unity; while we cling to unity, if we do not make a fictitious
unity in a party by our own words, but recognize it in a united whole
through the words of Christ.
CHAP. 79.--173. PETILIANUS said: "And again, 'Charity suffereth long,
and is kind charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed
up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own.' But you seek
what belongs to other men. 'Is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things,
endureth all things. Charity never faileth.'(1) This is to say, in short,
Charity does not persecute, does not inflame emperors to take away the
lives of other men; does not plunder other men's goods; does not go on to
murder men whom it has spoiled."
174. AUGUSTIN answered: How often must I tell you the same thing? If
you do not prove these charges, they tell against no one in the world; and
if you prove them, they have no bearing upon us; just as those things have
no bearing upon you which are daily done by the furious deeds of the
insane, by the luxury of the drunken, by the blindness of the suicides, by
the tyranny of robbers. For who can fail to see that what I say is true?
But now if charity were in you, it would rejoice in the truth. For how
neatly it is said under covering of the sheep's clothing, "Charity beareth
all things, endureth all things!" but when you come to the test, the wolf's
teeth cannot be concealed. For when, in obedience to the words of
Scripture, "forbearing one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity
of the Spirit in the bond of peace,"(2) charity would compel you, even if
you knew of any evils within the Church, I do not say to consent to them,
but yet to tolerate them if you could not prevent them, test, on account of
the wicked who are to be separated by the winnowing-fan at the last day,
you should at the present time sever the bond of peace by breaking off from
the society of good men, you, resisting her influence, and being cast out
by the wind of levity, charge the wheat with being chaff, and declare that
what you invent of the wicked holds good through the force of contagion
even in the righteous. And when the Lord has said, "The field is the World,
the harvest is the end of the world," though He said of the wheat and of
the tares, "Let both grow together until the harvest,"(3) you endeavor by
your words to bring about a belief that the wheat has perished throughout
the main portion of the field, and only continued to exist in your little
corner,--being desirous that Christ should be proved a liar, but you the
man of truth. And you speak, indeed, against your own conscience; for no
one who in any way looks truly at the gospel will venture in his heart to
say that in all the many nations throughout which is heard the response of
Amen, and among whom Alleluia is sung almost with one single voice, no
Christians are to be found. And yet, that it may not appear that the party
of Donatus, which does not communicate with the several nations of the
world, is involved in error, if any angel from heaven, who could see the
whole world, were to declare that outside your communion good and innocent
men were nowhere to be found, there is little doubt that you would rejoice
over the iniquity of the human race, and boast of having told the truth
before you had received assurance of it. How then is there in you that
charity which rejoices not in iniquity? But be not deceived. Throughout the
field, that is, throughout the world, there will be found the wheat of the
Lord growing till the end of the world. Christ has said this: Christ is
truth. Let charity be in you, and let it rejoice in the truth. Though an
angel from heaven preach unto you another gospel contrary to His gospel,
let him be accursed.(4)
CHAP. 80.--175. PETILIANUS said: "Lastly, what is the justification of
persecution? I ask you, you wretched men, if it so be that you think that
your sin rests on any authority of law."
176. AUGUSTIN answered: He who sins, sins not on the authority of the
law, but against the authority of the law. But since you ask what is the
justification of persecution, I ask you in turn whose voice it is that says
in the psalm, "Whoso privily slandereth his neighbor, him will I cut
off."(1) Seek therefore the reason or the measure of the persecution, and
do not display your gross ignorance by finding fault in general terms with
those who persecute the unrighteous.
CHAP. 81.--177. PETILIANUS said: "But I answer you, on the other hand,
that Jesus Christ never persecuted any one. And when the apostle found
fault with certain parties, and suggested that He should have recourse to
persecution (He Himself having come to create faith by inviting men to Him,
rather than by compelling them), those apostles say, 'Many lay on hands in
Thy name, and are not with us:' but Jesus said, 'Let them alone; if they
are not against you, they are on your side.'"
178. AUGUSTIN answered: You say truly that you will bring forth out of
your store with greater abundance things which are not written in the
Scriptures. For if you wish to bring forth proofs from holy Scripture, will
you bring forth even those which you cannot find therein? But it is in your
own power to multiply your lies according to your will. For where is what
you quoted written? or when was that either suggested to our Lord, or
answered by our Lord? "Many lay on hands in Thy name, and are not with us,"
are words that no one of the disciples ever uttered to the Son of God; and
therefore neither could the answer have been made by Him, "Let them alone:
if they are not against you, they are on your side." But there is something
somewhat like it which we really do read in the gospel,--that a suggestion
was made to the Lord about a certain man who was casting out devils in His
name, but did not follow Him with His disciples; and in that case the Lord
does say, "Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us."(2) But
this has nothing to do with pointing out parties whom the Lord is supposed
to have spared. And if you have been deceived by an apparent resemblance of
sentiment, this is not a lie, but merely human infirmity. But if you wished
to cast a mist of falsehood over those who are unskilled in holy Scripture,
then may you be pricked to the heart, and covered with confusion and
corrected. Yet there is a point which we would urge in respect of this very
man of whom the suggestion was made to our Lord. For even as at that time,
beyond the communion of the disciples, the holiness of Christ was yet of
the greatest efficacy, even so now, beyond the communion of the Church, the
holiness of the sacraments is of avail For neither is baptism consecrated
save in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But
who will be so utterly insane as to declare that the name of the Son may be
of avail even beyond the communion of the Church, but that this is not
possible with the names of the Father and of the Holy Ghost? or that it may
be of avail in healing a man, but not in consecrating baptism? But it is
manifest that outside the communion of the Church, and the most holy bond
of unity, and the most excellent gift of charity, neither he by whom the
devil is cast out nor he who is baptized obtains eternal life; just as
those do not obtain it, who through communion in the sacraments seem indeed
to be within, and through the depravity of their character are understood
to be without. But that Christ persecuted even with bodily chastisement
those whom He drove with scourges from the temple, we have already said
above.
CHAP. 82.--179. PETILIANUS said: "But the holy apostle said this: 'In
any way, whatsoever it may be,' he says, 'let Christ be preached.'"
180. AUGUSTIN answered: You speak against yourself; but yet, since you
speak on the side of truth, if you love it, let what you say be counted for
you. For I ask of you of whom it was that the Apostle Paul said this? Let
us, if you please, trace this a little further back. "Some," he says,
"preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will, some of
love, knowing that I am set for the defense of the gospel. But some indeed
preach Christ even of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add
affliction to my bonds. What then? notwithstanding every way, whether in
pretense, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea,
and will rejoice."(3) We see that they preached what was in itself holy,
and pure, and true, but yet not in a pure manner, but of envy and
contention, without charity, without purity. Certainty a short time ago you
appeared to be urging the praises of charity as against us, according to
the witness of the apostle, that where there is no charity, whatever there
is is of no avail; and yet you see that in those there is no charity, and
there was with them the preaching of Christ, of which the apostle says here
that he rejoices. For it is not that he rejoices in what is evil in them,
but in what is good in the name of Jesus Christ. In him assuredly there was
the charity which "rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the
truth."(1) The envy, moreover, which was in them is an evil proceeding from
the devil, for by this he has both killed and cast down. Where then were
these wicked men whom the apostle thus condemns, and in whom there was so
much that was good to cause him to rejoice? Were they within, or without?
Choose which you will. If they were within, then Paul knew them, and yet
they did not pollute him. And so you would not be polluted in the unity of
the whole world by those of whom you make certain charges, whether these be
true, or falsehoods invented by yourselves. Wherefore do you separate
yourself? Why do you destroy yourself by the criminal sacrilege of schism?
But if they were without, then you see that even in those who were without,
and who certainly cannot belong to everlasting life, since they have not
charity, and do not abide in unity, there is yet found the holiness of the
name of Christ, so that the apostle joyfully confirms their teaching, on
account of the intrinsic holiness of the name, although he repudiates them.
We are right, therefore, in not doing wrong to the actual name, when those
come to us who were without; but we correct the individuals, while we do
honor to the name. Do you therefore take heed, and see how wickedly you act
in the case of those whose acts as it seems you condemn, by treating as
naught the sacrament of the name of Christ, which is holy in them. And you,
indeed, as is shown by your words, think that those men of whom the apostle
spoke were outside the limits of the Church. Therefore, when you fear
persecution from the Catholics, of which you speak in order to create odium
against us, you have confirmed in heretics the name of Christ to which you
do despite by rebaptizing.
CHAP. 83.--181. PETILIANUS said: "If then there are not some to whom
all this power of faith is found to be in Opposition, on what principle do
you persecute, so as to compel men to defile themselves:?"
182. AUGUSTIN answered: We neither persecute you, except so far as
truth persecutes falsehood; nor has it anything to do with us if any one
has persecuted you in other ways, just as it has nothing to do with you if
any of your party do likewise; nor do we compel you to defile yourselves,
but we persuade you to be cured.
CHAP. 84.--183. PETILIANUS said: "But if authority had been given by
some law for persons to be compelled to what is good, you yourselves,
unhappy men, ought to have been compelled by us to embrace the purest
faith. But far be it, far be it from our conscience to compel any one to
embrace our faith."
184. AUGUSTIN answered: No one is indeed to be compelled to embrace the
faith against his will; but by the severity, or one might rather say, by
the mercy of God, it is common for treachery to be chastised with the
scourge of tribulation. Is it the case, because the best morals are chosen
by freedom of will, that therefore the worst morals are not punished by
integrity of law? But yet discipline to punish an evil manner of living is
out of the question, except where principles of good living which had been
learned have come to be despised. If any laws, therefore, have been enacted
against you, you are not thereby forced to do well, but are only prevented
from doing ill.(2) For no one can do well unless he has deliberately
chosen, and unless he has loved what is in free will; but the fear of
punishment, even if it does not share in the pleasures of a good
conscience, at any rate keeps the evil desire from escaping beyond the
bounds of thought. Who are they, however, that have enacted adverse laws by
which your audacity could be repressed? Are they not those of whom the
apostle says that "they bear not the sword in vain; for they are the
ministers of God, revengers to execute wrath upon them that do evil?"(3)
The whole question therefore is, whether you are not doing ill, who are
charged by the whole world with the sacrilege of so great a schism. And
yet, neglecting the discussion of this question, you talk on irrelevant
matters; and while you live as robbers, you boast that you die as
martyrs.(4) And, through fear either of the laws themselves, or of the
odium which you might incur, or else because you are unequal to the task of
resisting, I do not say so many men, but so many Catholic nations, you even
glory in your gentleness, that you do not compel any to join your party.
According to your way of talking, the hawk, when he has been prevented by
flight from carrying off the fowls, might call himself a dove. For when
have you ever had the power without using it? And hence you show how you
would do more if you only could. When Julian, envying the peace of Christ,
restored to you the churches which belonged to unity, who could tell of all
the massacres which were committed by you, when the very devils rejoiced
with you at the opening of their temples? In the war with Firmus and his
party, let Mauritania Caesariensis itself be asked to tell us what the Moor
Rogatus(1) suffered at your hands. In the time of Gildo, because one of
your colleagues(2) was his intimate friend, let the followers of Maximianus
be our witnesses to their sufferings. For if one might appeal to Felicianus
himself, who is now with you, on his oath, whether Optatus did not compel
him against his will to return to your communion, he would not dare to open
his lips, especially if the people of Musti could behold his face, who were
witnesses to everything that was done. But let them, as I have said, be
witnesses to what they have suffered at the hands of those with whom they
acted in such wise towards Rogatus. The Catholic Church herself, though
strengthened by the assistance of Catholic princes ruling by land and sea,
was savagely attacked by hostile troops in arms under Optatus. It was this
that first made it necessary to urge before the vicar Seranus that the law
should be put in force against you which imposes a fine of ten pounds of
gold, which none of you have ever paid to this very day, and yet you charge
us with cruelty. But where could you find a milder course of proceeding,
than that crimes of such magnitude on your part should be punished by the
imposition of a pecuniary fine? Or who could enumerate all the deeds which
you commit in the places which you hold, of your own sovereign will and
pleasure, each one as he can, without any friendship on the part of judges
or any others in authority? Who is there of our party, among the
inhabitants of our towns, who has not either learned something of this sort
from those who came before him, or experienced it for himself? Is it not
the case that at Hippo, where I am, there are not wanting some who remember
that your leader Faustinus gave orders, in the time of his supreme power,
in consequence of the scanty numbers of the Catholics in the place, that no
one should bake their bread for them, insomuch that a baker, who was the
tenant of one of our deacons, threw away the bread of his landlord unbaked,
and though he was not sentenced to exile under any law, he cut him off from
all share in the necessaries of life not only in a Roman state,(3) but even
in his own country, and not only in his own country, but in his own house?
Why, even lately, as I myself recall with mourning to this day, did not
Crispinus of Calama, one of your party, having bought a property, and that
only copy-hold,(4) boldly and unhesitatingly immerse in the waters of a
second baptism no less than eighty souls, murmuring with miserable groans
under the sole influence of terror; and this in a farm belonging to the
Catholic emperors, by whose laws you were forbidden even to be in any Roman
city?(5) But what else was it, save such deeds as these of yours, that
made it necessary for the very laws to be passed of which you complain? The
laws, indeed, are very far from being proportionate to your offenses; but,
such as they are, you may thank yourselves for their existence. Indeed,
should we not certainly be driven on all sides from the country by the
furious attacks of your Circumcelliones, who fight under your command in
furious troops, unless we held you as hostages in the towns, who might well
be unwilling to endure under any circumstances the mere gaze of the people,
and the censure of all honorable men. from very shame, if not from fear? Do
not therefore say, "Far be it, far be it from our conscience, to force any
one to embrace our faith." For you do it when you can; and when you do not
do it, it is because you are unable, either from fear of the laws or the
odium which would accompany it, or because of the numbers of those who
would resist.
CHAP. 85.--185. PETILIANUS said: "For the Lord Christ says, 'No man can
come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him.'(1) But why do
we not permit each several person to follow his free will, since the Lord
God Himself has given free will to men, showing to them, however, the way
of righteousness, lest any one by chance should perish from ignorance of
it? For He said, 'I have placed before thee good and evil. I have set fire
and water before thee; choose which thou wilt.' From which choice, you
wretched men, you have chosen for yourselves not water, but rather fire.
'But yet,' He says, 'choose the good, that thou mayest live.'(7) You who
will not choose the good, have, by your own sentence, declared that you do
not wish to live."
186. AUGUSTIN answered: If I were to propose to you the question how
God the Father draws men to the Son, when He has left them to themselves in
freedom of action, you would perhaps find it difficult of solution. For how
does He draw them to Him if He leaves them to themselves, so that each
should choose what he pleases? And yet both these facts are true; but this
is a truth which few have intellect enough to penetrate. As therefore it is
possible that, after leaving men to themselves in free will, the Father
should yet draw them to the Son, so is it also possible that those warnings
which are given by the correction of the laws do not take away free will.
For whenever a man suffers anything that is harsh and unpleasing, he is
warned to consider why it is that he is suffering, so that, if he shall
discover that he is suffering in the cause of justice, he may choose the
good that consists in the very act of suffering as he does in the cause of
justice; but if he sees that it is unrighteousness for which he suffers, he
may be induced, from the consideration that he is suffering and being
tormented most fruitlessly, to change his purpose for the better, and may
at the same time escape both the fruitless annoyance and the
unrighteousness itself, which is likely to prove yet more hurtful and
pernicious in the mischief it produces. And so you, when kings make any
enactments against you, should consider that you are receiving a warning to
consider why this is being done to you. For if it is for righteousness'
sake, then are they truly your persecutors; but you are the blessed ones,
who, being persecuted for righteousness' sake, shall inherit the kingdom of
heaven:(1) but if it is because of the iniquity of your schism, what are
they more than your correctors; while you, like all the others who are
guilty of various crimes, and pay the penalty appointed by the law, are
undoubtedly unhappy both in this world and in that which is to come? No
one, therefore, takes away from you your free will. But I would urge you
diligently to consider which you would rather chooses--whether to live
corrected in peace, or, by persevering in malice, to undergo real
punishment under the false name of martyrdom. But I am addressing you just
as though you were suffering something proportionate to your sin, whereas
you are committing sins of such enormity and reigning in such impunity. You
are so furious, that you cause more terror than a war trumpet with your cry
of "Praise to God;" so full of calumny, that even when you throw yourselves
over precipices without any provocation, you impute it to our persecutions.
187. He says also, like the kindest of teachers, "You who will not
choose the good, have, by your own sentence, declared that you do not wish
to live." According to this, if we were to believe your accusations, we
should live in kindness; but because we believe the promises of God, we
declare by our own sentence that we do not wish to live. You remember well,
it seems to me, what the apostles answered to the Jews when they were
desired to abstain from preaching Christ. This therefore we also say, that
you should answer us whether we ought rather to obey God or man.(2)
Traditors, offerers of incense, persecutors: these are the words of men
against men. Christ remained only in the love of Donatus: these are the
words of men extolling the glory of a man under the name of Christ, that
the glory of Christ Himself may be diminished. For it is written, "In the
multitude of people is the king's honor: but in the want of people is the
destruction of the prince:"(3) these, therefore, are the words of men. But
those words in the gospel, "It behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from
the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be
preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem,"(4) are the
words of Christ, showing forth the glory which He received from His Father
in the wideness of His kingdom. When we have heard them both, we choose in
preference the communion of the Church, and prefer the words of Christ to
the words of men. I ask, who is there that can say that we have chosen what
is evil, except one who shall say that Christ taught what was evil?
CHAP. 86.--188. PETILIANUS said: "Is it then the case that God has
ordered the massacre even of schismatics? and if He were to issue such an
order at all, you ought to be slain by some barbarians and Scythians, not
by Christians."
189. AUGUSTIN answered: Let your Circumcelliones remain quiet, and let
me entreat you not to terrify us about barbarians. But as to whether we or
you are schismatics, let the question be put neither to you nor to me, but
to Christ, that He may show where His Church is to be found. Read the
gospel then, and there you find the answer, "In JerusaIem, and in all
Judea, and in Samaria and even in the whole earth."(1) If any one,
therefore, is not found within the Church, let not any further question be
put to him, but let him either be corrected or converted, or else, being
detected, let him not complain.
CHAP. 87.--190. PETILIANUS said: "For neither has the Lord God at any
time rejoiced in human blood, seeing that He was even willing that Cain,
the murderer of his brother, should continue to exist in his murderer's
life."
191. AUGUSTIN answered: If God was unwilling that death should be
inflicted on him who slew his brother, preferring that he should continue
to exist in his murderer's life, see whether this be not the cause why,
seeing that the heart of the king is in the hand of God, whereby he has
himself enacted many laws for your correction and reproof, yet no law of
the king has commanded that you should be put to death, perhaps with this
very object, that any one of you who persists in the obstinate self-will of
his sacrilegious madness should be tortured with the punishment of the
fratricide Cain, that is to say, with the life of a murderer. For we read
that many were slain in mercy by Moses the servant of the Lord; for in that
he prayed thus in intercession to the Lord for their wicked sacrilege,
saying, "O Lord, if Thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I
pray thee, out of the book which Thou hast written,"(2) his unspeakable
charity and mercy are plainly shown. Could it be, then, that he was
suddenly changed to cruelty, when, on descending from the mount, he ordered
so many thousands to be slain? Consider, therefore, whether it may not be a
sign of greater anger on the part of God, that, whilst so many laws have
been enacted against you, you have not been ordered by any emperor to be
put to death. Or do you think that you are not to be compared to that
fratricide? Hearken to the Lord speaking through His prophet: "From the
rising of the sun, even unto the going down of the same, my name shall be
great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto
my name, and a pure offering; for my name shall be great among the heathen,
saith the Lord of hosts."(3) On this brother's sacrifice you show that you
look with malignant eyes, over and above the respect which God pays to it;
and if ye have ever heard that "from the rising of the sun, unto the going
down of the same, the Lord's name is to be praised,"(4) which is that
living sacrifice of which it is said, "Offer unto God thanksgiving,"(5)
then will your countenance fall like that of yonder murderer. But inasmuch
as you cannot kill the whole world, you are involved in the same guilt by
your mere hatred, according to the words of John, "Whosoever hateth his
brother is a murderer."(6) And I would that any innocent brother might
rather fall into the hands of your Circumcelliones, to be murdered by their
weapons, than be subjected to the poison of your tongue and rebaptized.
CHAP. 88.--192. PETILIANUS said: "We advise you, therefore, if so be
that you will hear it willingly, and even though you do not willingly
receive it, yet we warn you that the Lord Christ instituted for Christians,
not any form of slaying, but one of dying only. For if He loved men who
thus delight in battle, He would not have consented to be slain for us."
193. AUGUSTIN answered: Would that your martyrs would follow the form
that He prescribed! they would not throw themselves over precipices, which
He refused to do at the bidding of the devil.(7) But when you persecute our
ancestors with false witness even now that they are dead, whence have you
received this form? In that you endeavor to stain us with the crimes of men
we never knew, while you are unwilling that the most notorious misdeeds of
your own party should he reckoned against you, whence have you received
this form? But we are too much yielding to our own conceit if we find fault
about ourselves, when we see that you utter false testimony against the
Lord Himself, since He Himself both promised and made manifest that His
Church should extend throughout all nations, and you maintain the contrary.
This form, therefore, you did not receive even from the Jewish persecutors
themselves, for they persecuted His body while He was walking on the earth:
you persecute His gospel as He is seated in heaven. Which gospel endured
more meekly the flames of furious kings than it can possibly endure your
tongues; for while they blazed, unity remained, and this it cannot do amid
your words. They who desired that the word of God should perish in the
flames did not believe that it could be despised if read. They would not,
therefore, set their flames to work upon the gospel, if you would let them
use your tongues against the gospel. In the earlier persecution the gospel
of Christ was sought by some in their rage, it was betrayed by others in
their fear; it was burned by some in their rage, it was hidden by others in
their love; it was attacked, but none were found to speak against its
truth. The more accursed share of persecution was reserved for you when the
persecution of the heathen was exhausted. Those who persecuted the name of
Christ believed in Christ: now those who are honored for the name of Christ
are found to speak against His truth.
CHAP. 89.--194. PETILIANUS said: "Here you have the fullest possible
proof that a Christian may take no part in the destruction of another. But
the first establishing of this principle was in the case of Peter, as it is
written, "Simon Peter having a sword, drew it, and smote the high priest's
servant, and cut off his right ear. Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy
sword into the sheath. For all they that take the sword shall perish with
the sword.'"(1)
195. AUGUSTIN answered: Why then do you not restrain the weapons of the
Circumcelliones with such words as these? Should you think that you were
going beyond the words of the gospel if you should say, All they that take
the cudgel shall perish with the cudgel? Withhold not then your pardon, if
our ancestors were unable to restrain the men by whom you complain that
Marculus was thrown down a precipice; for neither is it written in the
gospel, He that useth to throw men down a precipice shall be cast
therefrom. And would that, as your charges are either false or out of date,
so the cudgels of those friends of yours would cease! And yet, perhaps, you
take it ill that, if not by force of law, at any rate in words, we take
away their armor from your legions in saying that they manifest their rage
with sticks alone. For that was the ancient fashion of their wickedness,
but now they have advanced too far. For amid their drunken revellings, and
amid the free license of assembling together, wandering in the streets,
jesting, drinking, passing the whole night in company with women who have
no husbands, they have learned not only to brandish cudgels, but to wield
swords and whirl slings. But why should I not say to them (God knows with
what feelings I say it and with what feelings they receive it!), Madmen,
the sword of Peter, though drawn from motives not yet free from fleshly
impurity, was yet drawn in defence of the body of Christ against the body
of His persecutor, but your arms are portioned out against the cause of
Christ; but the body of which He is the head, that is, His Church, extends
throughout all nations. He Himself has said I this, and has ascended into
heaven, whither the fury of the Jews could not follow Him; and it is your
fury which attacks His members in the body, which on His ascension He
commended to our care. In defense of those members all men rage against
you, all men resist you, as many as being in the Catholic Church, and
possessing as yet but little faith, are influenced by the same motives as
Peter was when he drew his sword in the name of Christ. But there is a
great difference between your persecution and theirs. You are like the
servant of the Jews' high priest; for in the service of your princes you
arm yourselves against the Catholic Church, that is, against the body of
Christ. But they are such as Peter then was, fighting even with the
strength of their bodies for the body of Christ, that is, the Church. But
if they are bidden to be still, as Peter then was bidden, I how much more
should you be warned that, laying aside the madness of heresy, you should
join the unity of those members for which they so fight? But, being wounded
by such men as these, you hate us also; and, as though you had lost your
right ears, you do not hear the voice of Christ as He sits at the right
hand of the Father. But to whom shall I address myself, or how shall I
address myself to them, seeing that in them I find no time wherein to
speak? for even early in the morning they are reeking with wine, drunk, it
may be already in the day, it may be still from overnight. Moreover, they
utter threats, and not they only, but their own bishops utter threats
concerning them, being ready to deny that what they have done has any
bearing on them. May the Lord grant to us a song of degrees, in which we
may say, "When I am with those who hate peace, I am peaceful. When I would
speak with them, they are wont to fight me without cause."(2) For thus says
the body of Christ, which throughout the whole world is assailed by
heretics, by some here, by others there, and by all alike wherever they may
be.(3)
CHAP. 90.--196. PETILIANUS said:(44) "Therefore I say, He ordained that
we should undergo death for the faith, which each man should do for the
communion of the Church. For Christianity makes progress by the deaths of
its followers. For if death were feared by the faithful, no man would be
found to live with perfect faith. For the Lord Christ says, 'Except a corn
of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it
bringeth forth much fruit.'"(1)
197. AUGUSTIN answered: I should be glad to know which of your party it
was who first threw himself over a precipice. For truly that grain of corn
was fruitful from which so great a crop of similar suicides has sprung.
Tell me, when you make mention of the, words of the Lord, that He says a
grain of wheat shall die and bring forth much fruit, why do you envy the
real fruit, which has most truly(2) sprung up throughout the whole world,
and bring up against it all the charges of the tares or chaff which you
have ever either heard of or invented?
CHAP. 91.--198. PETILIANUS said: "But you scatter thorns and tares, not
seeds of corn. so that you ought to be burned together with them at the
last judgment. We do not utter curses; but every thorny conscience is bound
under this penalty by the sentence which God has pronounced."
199. AUGUSTIN answered: Surely, when you mention tares, it might bring
to your minds the thought of wheat as well; for both have been commanded to
grow together in the field until the harvest. But you fix the eye of malice
fiercely on the tares, and maintain, in opposition to the express
declaration of Christ, that they alone have grown throughout the earth,
with the exception of Africa alone.
CHAP. 92.--200. PETILIANUS said: "Where is the saying of the Lord
Christ, 'Whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the
other also'?(3) Where is the patience which He displayed when they spat
upon, His face, who Himself with His most holy spittle opened the eyes of
the blind? Where is the saying of the Apostle Paul, 'If a man smite you in
the face?' Where is that other saying of the same apostle, 'In stripes
above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft'?(4) He makes
mention of the sufferings which he underwent, not of the deeds which he
performed. It had been enough for the Christian faith that these things
should be done by the Jews: why do you, wretched men, do these others in
addition?"
201. AUGUSTIN answered: Is it then really so, that when men smite you
on the one cheek, you turn to them the other? This is not the report that
your furious bands won for you by wandering everywhere throughout the whole
of Africa with dreadful wickedness. I would fain have it that men should
make a bargain with you, that, in accordance with the old law, you should
seek but "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,"(5) instead of bringing
out cudgels in return for the words which greet your ears.
CHAP. 93.--202. PETILIANUS said: "But what have you to do with the
kings of this world, in whom Christianity has never found anything save
envy towards her? And to teach you shortly the truth of what I say, A king
persecuted the brethren of the Maccabees.(6) A king also condemned the
three children to the sanctifying flames, being ignorant what lie did,
seeing that he himself was fighting against God.' A king sought the life of
the infant Saviour.(8) A king exposed Daniel, as he thought, to be eaten by
wild beasts.(9) And the Lord Christ Himself was slain by a king's most
wicked judge.(10) Hence it is that the apostle cries out, 'We speak wisdom
among them that are perfect; yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the
princes of this world, that come to nought: but we speak the wisdom of God
in a mystery, which was hidden, which God ordained before the world unto
our glory; which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known
it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.'(11) But grant that
this was said of the heathen kings of old. Yet you, rulers of this present
age, because you desire to be Christians, do not allow men to be
Christians, seeing that, when they are believing in all honesty of heart,
you draw them by the defilement and mist of your falsehood wholly over to
your wickedness, that with their arms, which were provided against the
enemies of the state, they should assail the Christians, and should think
that, at your instigation, they are doing the work of Christ if they kill
us whom you hate, according to the saying of the Lord Christ: 'The time
cometh,' He says, 'that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God
service.'(12) It makes no matter therefore to you, false teachers, whether
the kings of this world desire to be heathens, which God forbid, or
Christians, so long as you cease not in your efforts to arm them against
the family of Christ. But do you not know, or rather, have you not read,
that the guilt of one who instigates a murder is greater than the guilt of
him who carries it out? Jezebel had excited the king her husband to the
murder of a poor and righteous man, yet husband and wife alike perished by
an equal punishment.(1) Nor indeed is your mode of urging on kings
different from that by which the subtle persuasion of women has often urged
kings on to guilt. For the wife of Herod earned and obtained the boon by
means of her daughter, that the head of John should be brought to table in
a charger.(2) Similarly the Jews forced on Pontius Pilate that he should
crucify the Lord Jesus, whose blood Pilate prayed might remain in vengeance
upon them and on their children.(3) So therefore you also overwhelm
yourselves with our blood by your sin. For it does not follow that because
it is the hand of the judge that strikes the blow, your calumnies therefore
are not rather guilty of the deed. For the prophet David says, speaking in
the person of Christ, 'Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a
vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take
counsel together, against the Lord, and against His Anointed, saying, Let
us break their bands asunder, and east away their cords from us. He that
sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
Then shall He speak unto them in His wrath, and vex them in His sore
displeasure. Yet have I set my King upon my holy hill of Zion. I will
declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day
have I begotten Thee. Ask of me, and I shall give Thee the heathen for
Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts, of the earth for Thy
possession. Thou shalt rule them with a rod of iron; Thou shalt dash I them
in pieces like a potter's vessel.' And he warned the kings themselves in
the following precepts, that they should not, like ignorant men devoid of
understanding, seek to persecute the Christians, lest they should
themselves be destroyed,--which precepts I would that we could teach them,
seeing that they are ignorant of them; or, at least, that you would show
them to them, as doubtless you would do if you desired that they should
live; or, at any rate; if neither of the other courses be allowed, that
your malice would have permitted them to read them for themselves. The
first Psalm of David would certainly have persuaded them that they should
live and reign as Christians; but meanwhile you deceive them, so long as
they entrust themselves to you. For you represent to them things that are
evil, and you hide from them what is good. Let them then at length read
this, which they should have read already long ago. For what does he say,
'Be wise now therefore, O ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Lay hold of
instruction lest the Lord be angry, and ye perish from the right way. Since
how quickly has His wrath kindled over you? Blessed are all they that put
their trust in Him.'(4) You urge on emperors, I say, with your persuasions,
even as Pilate, whom, as we showed above, the Jews urged on, though he
himself cried aloud, as he washed his hands before them all, 'I am innocent
of the blood of this just person,'(5)--as though a person could be clear
from the guilt of a sin who had himself committed it. But, to say nothing
of ancient examples, observe, from instances taken from your own party, how
very many of your emperors and judges have perished in persecuting us. To
pass over Nero, who was the first to persecute the Christians, Domitian
perished almost in the same way as Nero, as also did Trajan, Geta,(6)
Decius, Valerian, Diocletian; Maximian also perished, at whose command that
men should burn incense to their gods, burning the sacred volumes,
Marcellinus indeed first, but after him also Mensurius of Carthage, and
Caecilianus, escaped death from the sacrilegious flames, surviving like
some ashes or cinders from the burning. For the consciousness of the guilt
of burning incense involved you all, as many as agreed with Mensurius.
Macarius perished, Ursacius(7) perished, and all your counts perished in
like manner by the vengeance of God. For Ursacius was slain in a battle
with the barbarians, after which birds of prey with their savage talons,
and the greedy teeth of dogs with their biting, tore him limb from limb.
Was not he too a murderer at your suggestion, who, like king Ahab, whom we
showed to have been persuaded by a woman, slew a poor and righteous man?(8)
So you too do not cease to murder us, who are just and poor (poor, that is,
in worldly wealth; for in the grace of God no one of us is poor). For even
if you do not murder a man with your hands, you do not cease to do so with
your butcherous tongues. For it is written, 'Death and life are in the
power of the tongue.'(1) All, therefore, who have been murdered, you the
instigator of the deed, have slain. Nor indeed does the hand of the butcher
glow save at the instigation of your tongue; and that terrible heat of the
breast is inflamed by your words to take the blood of others,--blood that
shall take a just vengeance upon him who shed it."
203. AUGUSTIN answered: If I were to answer adequately, and as I ought,
to this passage, which has been exaggerated and arranged at such length by
you, where you speak in invidious terms against us concerning the kings of
this world, I am much afraid that you would accuse me too of having wished
to excite the anger of kings against you. And yet, whilst you are borne
after your own fashion by the violence of this invective against all
Catholics, you certainly do not pass me by. I will endeavor, however, to
show, if I can, that it is rather you who have been guilty of this offense
by speaking as you have done, than myself by answering as I shall do. And
first of all, see how you yourself oppose your self; for certainly you
prefaced the passage which you quoted with the words, "What have you to do
with the kings of this world, in whom Christianity has never found anything
save envy towards her?" In these words you certainly cut off from us all
access to the kings of this world. And a little later you say, "And he
warned the kings themselves in the following precepts, that they should
not, like ignorant men devoid of understanding, seek to persecute the
Christians, lest they should be themselves destroyed,--which precepts I
would that we could teach them, seeing that they are ignorant of them; or,
at least, that you would show them to them, as doubtless you would do if
you desired that they should live." In what way then do you wish us to be
the instructors of kings? And indeed those of our body who have any
friendship with Christian kings commit no sin if they make a right use of
that friendship; but if any are elated by it, they yet sin far less
grievously than you. For what had you, who thus reproach us,--what had you
to do with a heathen king, and what is worse, with Julian, the apostate and
enemy of the name of Christ, to whom, when you were begging that the
basilicas should be restored to you as though they were your own, you
ascribed this meed of praise, "that in him justice alone was found to have
a place"?--in which words (for I believe that you understand the Latin
tongue) both the idolatry and the apostasy of Julian are styled justice. I
hold in my hands the petition which your ancestors presented; the
memorial(2) which embodied their request; the chronicles, where they made
their representation. Watch and attend. To the enemy of Christ, to the
apostate, the antagonist of Christians, the servant of the devil, that
friend, that representative, that Pontius of yours, made supplication in
such words as these: "Go to then, and say to us, What have you to do with
the kings of this world?" that as deaf men you may read to the deaf nations
what you as well as they refuse to hear;" Thou beholdest the mote that is
in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own
eye."(3)
204. "What," say you, "have you to do with the kings of this world, in
whom Christianity has never found anything save envy towards her?" Having
said this, you endeavored to reckon up what kings the righteous had found
to be their enemies, and did not consider how many more might be enumerated
who have proved their friends. The patriarch Abraham was both most friendly
treated, and presented with a token of friendship, by a king who had been
warned from heaven not to defile his wife.(4) Isaac his son likewise found
a king most friendly to him.(5) Jacob, being received with honor by a king
in Egypt, went so far as to bless him.(6) What shall I say of his son
Joseph, who, after the tribulation of a prison, in which his chastity was
tried as gold is tried in the fire, being raised by Pharaoh to great
honors,(7) even swore by the life of Pharaoh,(8)--not as though puffed up
with vain conceit, but being not unmindful of his kindness. The daughter of
a king adopted Moses.(9) David took refuge with a king of another race,
compelled thereto by the unrighteousness of the king of Israel.(10) Elijah
ran before the chariot of a most wicked king,--not by the king's command,
but from his own loyalty.(11) Elisha thought it good to offer of his own
accord to the woman who had sheltered him anything that she might wish to
have obtained from the king through his intercession.(12) But I will come
to the actual times when the People of God were in captivity, in which, to
use a mild expression, a strange forgetfulness came over you. For, wishing
to prove that Christianity has never found anything in kings saving envy
towards her, you made mention of the three children and Daniel, who
suffered at the hands of persecuting kings, and you could not derive
instruction from circumstances not occurring near, but in the very same
passages, viz., from the conduct of the king himself after the miracle of
the flames which did no hurt, whether as shown in praising and setting
forth the name of God, or in honoring the three children themselves, or
from the esteem in which the king held Daniel, and the gifts with which he
honored him, nothing loth to receive them, when he, rendering the honor
that was due to the king's power, as sufficiently appears from his own
words, did not hesitate to use the gift with which he was endowed by God,
in interpreting the king's dream. And when, in consequence, the king was
compelled by the men who envied the holy prophet, and heaped calumnies upon
him with sacrilegious madness, most unwillingly to cast him into the den of
lions, sadly though he did it, yet he had the conviction that he would be
safe through the help and protection of his God. Accordingly, when Daniel,
by the miraculous repression of the lions' rage, had been preserved unhurt,
when the friendly voice of the king spoke first to him, in accents of
anxiety, he himself replied with benediction from the den, "O king, live
for ever!"(1) How came it that, when your argument was turning on the very
same subject, when you were yourself quoting the examples of the servants
of God in whose case these things were done, you either failed to see, or
were unwilling to see, or seeing and knowing, were silent, in a manner
which I know not how you will defend, about those instances of friendship
felt by kings for the saints? But if it were not that, as a defender of the
basest cause, you are hindered by the desire of building up falsehood, and
thereby turned away either as unwilling or as ignorant from the light of
truth, there can be no doubt that you could, without any difficulty, recall
some good kings as well as some bad ones, and some friendly to the saints
as well as some unfriendly. And we cannot but wonder that your
Circumcelliones thus throw themselves from precipices. Who was running
after you, I pray? What Macarius, what soldier was pursuing you? Certainly
none of our party thrust you into this abyss of falsehood. Why then did you
thus run headlong with your eyes shut, so that when you said, "What have
you to do with the kings of this world?" you did not add, In whom
Christianity has often found envy towards herself, instead of boldly
venturing to say, "In whom Christianity has never found anything save envy
towards her?" Was it really true that you neither thought yourself, nor
considered that those who read your writings would think, how many
instances of kings there were that went against your views? Does he not
know what he says?
205. Or do you think that, because those whom I have mentioned belonged
to olden times, therefore they form no argument against you, because you
did not say, In whom righteousness has never found anything save envy
towards her, but "In whom Christianity has never found anything saving envy
towards her,"--meaning, perhaps, that it should be understood that they
began to show envy towards the righteous from the time when they began to
bear the name of Christians? What then is the meaning of those examples
from olden times, by which you even more imprudently wished to prove what
you had so imprudently ventured to assert? For was it not before Christ was
born in the world that the Maccabees, and the three children, and Daniel,
did and suffered what you told of them? And again, why was it, as I asked
just now, that you offered a petition to Julian, the undoubted foe of
Christianity? Why did you seek to recover the basilicas from him? Why did
you declare that only righteousness found a place with him? If it is the
foe of Christianity that hears such things as these, what then are they
from whom he hears them? But it should be observed that Constantine, who
was certainly no foe to the name of Christian, but rather rendered glorious
by it, being mindful of the hope which he maintained in Christ, and
deciding most justly on behalf of His unity, was not worthy to be
acknowledged by you, even when you yourselves appealed to him. Both these
were emperors in Christian times, but yet not both of them were Christians.
But if both of them were foes of Christianity, why did you thus appeal to
one of them? why did you thus present a petition to the other? For on your
ancestors making their petition, Constantine had given an episcopal
judgment both at Rome and at Aries; and yet the first of them you accused
before him, from the other you appealed to him. But if, as is the case, one
of them had believed in Christ, the other had apostatized from Christ, why
is the Christian despised while furthering the interests of unity, the
apostate praised while favoring deceit? Constantine ordered that the
basilicas should be taken from you, Julian that they should be restored. Do
you wish to know which of these actions is conducive to Christian peace?
The one was done by a man who had believed in Christ, the other by one who
had abandoned Christ. O how you would wish that you could say, It was
indeed ill done that supplication should so be made to Julian, but what has
that to do with us? But if you were to say this, the Catholic Church would
also conquer in these same words, whose saints dispersed throughout the
world are much less concerned with what you say of those towards whom you
feel as you may be disposed to feel. But it is beyond your power to say, It
was ill done that supplication should so be made to Julian. Your throat is
closed; your tongue is checked by an authority close at home. It was
Pontius that did it. Pontius presented the petition; Pontius declared that
the apostate was most righteous; Pontius set forth that only righteousness
found a place with the apostate. That Pontius made a petition to him in
these Words, we have the express evidence of Julian himself, mentioning him
by name, without any disguise. Your representations still exist. It is no
uncertain rumor, but public documents that bear witness to the fact. Can it
be, that because the apostate made some concession to your prayer, to the
detriment of the unity of Christ, you therefore find truth in what was
said, that only righteousness found a place with him? but because Christian
emperors decide against your wishes, since this appears to them most likely
to contribute to the unity of Christ, therefore they are called the foes of
Christianity? Such folly may all heretics display; and may they regain
wisdom, so that they should be no longer heretics.
206. And when is that fulfilled, you will say, which the Lord declares,
"The time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God
service"?(1) At any rate neither can this be said of the heathen, who
persecuted Christians, not for the sake of God, but for the sake of their
idols. You do not see that if this had been said of these emperors who
rejoice in the name of Christian, their chief command would certainly have
been this, that you should have been put to death; and this command they
never gave at all. But the men of your party, by opposing the laws in
hostile fashion, bring deserved punishment on themselves; and their own
voluntary deaths, so long as they think that they bring odium on us, they
consider in no wise ruinous to themselves. But if they think that that
saying of Christ refers to kings who honor the name of Christ, let them ask
I what the Catholic Church suffered in the East, when, Valens the Arian was
emperor. There indeed I might find what I should understand to be
sufficient fulfillment of the saying of the Lord, "The time cometh, that
whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service," that heretics
should not claim, as conducing to their especial glory, the injunctions
issued against their errors by Catholic emperors. But we remember that that
time was fulfilled after the ascension of our Lord, of which holy Scripture
is known by all to be a witness. The Jews thought that they were doing a
service to God when they put the apostles to death. Among those who thought
that they were showing service to God was even our Saul, though not ours as
yet; so that among his causes for confidence which were past and to be
forgotten, he enumerates the following: "An Hebrew," he says, "of the
Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; concerning zeal, persecuting the
Church."(2) Here was one who thought that he did God service when he did
what presently he suffered himself. For forty Jews bound themselves by an
oath that they would slay him, when he caused that this should be made
known to the tribune, so that under the protection of a guard of armed men
he escaped their snares.(3) But there was no one yet to say to him, What
have you to do (not with kings, but) with tribunes and the arms of kings?
There was no one to say to him, Dare you seek protection at the hand of
soldiers, when your Lord was dragged by them to undergo His sufferings?
There were as yet no instances of madness such as yours; but there were
already examples being prepared, which should be sufficient for their
refutation.
207. Moreover, with what terrible force did you venture to set forth
and utter the following: "But to say nothing of ancient examples, observe,
from instances taken from your own party, how very many of your emperors
and judges have perished in persecuting us." When I read this in your
letter, I waited with the most earnest expectation to see what you were
going to say, and whom you were going to enumerate, when, lo and behold! as
though passing them over; you began to quote to me Nero, Domitian, Trajan,
Geta, Decius, Valerian, Diocletian, Maximian. I acknowledge that there were
more; but you have altogether forgotten against whom you are arguing. Were
not all of these pagans, persecuting generally the Christian name on behalf
of their idols? Be vigilant, then; for the men whom you mention were not of
our communion. They were persecuting the whole aggregate of unity itself,
from which we as you think, or you, as Christ teaches, have gone forth. But
you had proposed to show that our emperors and judges had perished in
consequence of persecuting you. Or is it that you yourself do not require
that we should reckon these, because, in mentioning them, you passed them
over, saying, "To pass over Nero;" and with this reservation did you mean
to run through all the rest? What then was the use of their being quoted,
if they had nothing to do with the matter? But what has it to do with me? I
now join with you in leaving these. Next, let that larger number which you
promised to us be produced, unless, indeed, it may be that they cannot be
found, inasmuch as you said that they had perished.
208. For now you go on to make mention of the bishops whom you are wont
to accuse of having delivered up the sacred books, concerning whom we on
our part are wont to answer: Either you fail in your proof, and so it
concerns no one at all; or you succeed and then it still has no concern
with us. For they have borne their own burden, whether it be good or bad;
and we indeed believe that it was good. But of whatever character it was,
yet it was their own; just as your bad men have borne their own burden, and
neither you theirs nor they yours. But the common and most evil burden of
you all is schism. This we have already often said before. Show us,
therefore, not the names of bishops, but the names of our emperors and
judges, who have perished in persecuting you. For this, is what you had
proposed, this is what you had promised, this is what you had caused us
most eagerly to expect. "Hear," he says, "Macarius perished, Ursacius
perished, and all your counts perished in like manner, by the vengeance of
God." You have mentioned only two by name, and neither of them was emperor.
Who would be satisfied with this, I ask? Are you not utterly dissatisfied
with yourself? You promise that you will mention a vast number of emperors
and judges of our party who perished in persecuting you; and then, without
a word of emperors, you mention two who were either judges or counts. For
as to what you add, "And all your counts perished in like manner by the
vengeance of God," it has nothing to do with the matter. For on this
principle you might some time ago have closed your argument, without
mentioning the name of any one at all. Why then have you not made mention
of our emperors, that is to say, of emperors of our communion? Were you
afraid that you should be indicted for high treason? Where is the fortitude
that marks the Circumcelliones? And further, what do you mean by
introducing those whom you mentioned above in such numbers? They might with
more right say to you, Why did you seek us out? For they did nothing to
assist your cause, and yet you mentioned them by name. What kind of man,
then, must you be, who fear to mention those by name, who, as you say, have
perished? At any rate, you might mention more of the judges and counts, of
whom you seem to feel no fear. But yet you stopped at Macarius and
Ursacius. Are these two whom you mention the vast number of whom you spoke?
Are you thinking of the lesson which we learned as boys? For if you were to
ask of me what number two is, singular or plural, what could I answer,
except that it was plural? But even so I am still not without the means of
reply. I take away Macarius from your list; for you certainly have not told
us how he perished. Or do you maintain that any one who persecutes you,
unless he be immortal on the face of this earth, is to be deemed when he
dies to have died because of you? What if Constantine had not lived to
enjoy so long a reign, and such prolonged prosperity, who was the first to
pass many decrees against your errors? And what if Julian, who gave you
back the basilicas, had not been so speedily snatched away from life?(1) In
that case, when would you make an end of talking such nonsense as you do,
seeing that even now you are unwilling to hold your tongues? And yet
neither do we say that Julian died so soon because he gave back the
basilicas to you. For we might be equally prolix with you in this, but we
are unwilling to be equally foolish. Well, then, as I had begun to say,
from these two we will take away Macarius. For when you had mentioned the
names of two, Macarius and Ursacius, you repeated the name of Ursacius with
the view of showing us how he deserved his death; and you said, "For
Ursacius was slain in a battle with the barbarians, after which birds of
prey with their savage talons, and the greedy teeth of dogs with their
biting, tore him limb from limb." Whence it is quite clear, since it is
your custom to excite greater odium against us on account of Macarius,
insomuch that you call us not Ursacians but Macarians, that you would have
been sure to say by far the most concerning him, had you been able to say
anything of the sort about his death. Of these two, therefore, when you
used the plural number, if you take away Macarius, there remains Ursacius
alone, a proper name of the singular number. Where is therefore the
fulfillment of your threatening and tremendous promise of so many who
should support your argument?
209. By this time all men who are in any degree acquainted with the
meaning of words must understand, it seems to me, how ridiculous it is
that, when you had said, "Macarius perished, Ursacius perished, and all
your counts perished in like manner, by the vengeance of God," as though
men were calling upon you to prove the fact, whereas, in reality, neither
hearer nor reader was calling on you for anything further whatsoever, you
immediately strung together a long argument in order to prove that all our
counts perished in like manner by the vengeance of God. "For Ursacius," you
say, "was slain in a battle with the barbarians, after which birds of prey
with their savage talons, and the greedy teeth of dogs with their biting,
tore him limb from limb." In the same way, any one else, who was similarly
ignorant of the meaning of what he says, might assert that all your bishops
perished in prison by the vengeance of God; and when asked how he could
prove this fact, he might at once add, For Optatus, having been accused of
belonging to the company of Gildo, was put to death in a similar way.
Frivolous charges such as these we are compelled to listen to, to consider,
to refute; only we are apprehensive for the weak, lest, from the greater
slowness of their intellect, they should fall speedily into your toils. But
Ursacius, of whom you speak, if it be the case that he lived a good life,
and really died as you assert, will receive consolation from the promise of
God, who says, "Surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand
of every beast will I require it."(1)
210. But as to the calumnious charges which you bring against us,
saying that by us the wrath of the kings of the world is excited against
you, so long as we do not teach them the lesson of holy Scripture, but
rather suggest our own desire of war, I do not imagine that you are so
absolutely deaf to the eloquence of the sacred books themselves as that you
should not rather fear that they should be acquainted with it. But whether
you so will or no, they gain entrance to the Church; and even if we hold
our tongues, they give heed to the readers; and, to say nothing of the
rest, they especially listen with the most marked attention to that very
psalm which you quoted. For you said that we do not teach them, nor, so far
as we can help it, allow them to become acquainted with the words of
Scripture: "Be wise now therefore, O ye kings; be instructed ye judges of
the earth. Serve the Lord with fear and rejoice with trembling. Take hold
of instruction lest the Lord be angry,(2) etc. Believe that even this is
sung, and that they hear it. But, at any rate, they hear what is written
above in the same psalm, which you, unless I am mistaken, were only
unwilling to pass over, for fear you should be understood to be afraid.
They hear therefore this as well "The Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my
Son; this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of me, and I shall give Thee the
heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy
possession."(3) On hearing which, they cannot but marvel that some should
be found to speak against this inheritance of Christ, endeavoring to reduce
it to a little corner of the earth; and in their marvel they perhaps ask,
on account of what they hear in what follows, "Serve the Lord with fear,"
wherein they can serve Him, in so far as they are kings. For all men ought
to serve God,--in one sense, m virtue of the condition common to them all,
in that they are men; in another sense, in virtue of their several gifts,
whereby this man has one function on the earth, and that man has another.
For no man, as a private individual, could command that idols should be
taken from the earth, which it was so long ago foretold should come to
pass.(3) Accordingly, when we take into consideration the social condition
of the human race, we find that kings, in the very fact that they are
kings, have a service which they can render to the Lord in a manner which
is impossible for any who have not the power of kings.
211. When, therefore, they think over what you quote, they hear also
what you yourself quoted concerning the three children, and hear it with
circumstances of marvellous solemnity. For that same Scripture is most of
all sung in the Church at a time when the very festal nature of the season
excites additional fervor even in those who, during the rest of the year,
are more given to be sluggish. What then do you think must be the feelings
of Christian emperors, when they hear of the three children being cast into
the burning fiery furnace because they were unwilling to consent to the
wickedness of worshipping the image of the king,(1) unless you suppose that
they consider that the pious liberty of the saints cannot be overcome
either by the power of kings, or by any enormity of punishment, and that
they rejoice that they are not of the number of those kings who used to
punish men that despised idols as though they were guilty of sacrilege?
But, further, when they hear in what follows that the same king, terrified
by the marvellous sight of, not only the three children, but the very
flames performing service unto God, himself too began to serve God in fear,
and to rejoice with reverence, and to lay hold of instruction, do they not
understand that the reason that this was recorded, and set forth with such
publicity, was that an example might be set both before the servants of
God, to prevent them from committing sacrilege in obedience to kings, and
before kings themselves, that they should show themselves religious by
belief in God? Being willing, therefore, on their part, from the admonition
of the very psalm which you yourself inserted in your writings, both to be
wise, and to receive instruction, and to serve God with fear and to rejoice
unto Him with reverence, and to lay hold of instruction, with what
attention do they listen to what that king said afterwards! For he said
that he would make a decree for all the people over whom he ruled, that
whosoever should speak blasphemy against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego should perish, and their house be utterly destroyed. And if they
know that he made this decree that blasphemy should not be uttered against
the God who tempered the force of the fire, and liberated the three
children, they surely go on to consider what decrees they ought to make in
their kingdom, that the same God who has granted remission of sins, and
given freedom to the whole earth, should not be treated with scorn among
the faithful in their realm.
212. See therefore, when Christian kings make any decree against you in
defence of Catholic unity, that it be not the case that with your lips you
are accusing them of being unlearned, as it were, in holy Scripture, while
in your hearts you are grieving that they are so well acquainted with its
teaching. For who could put up with the sacrilegious and hateful fallacy
which you advance in the case of one and the same Daniel, to find fault
with kings because he was cast into the den of lions, and to refuse praise
to kings in that he was raised to exalted honor, seeing that, even when he
was cast into the den of lions, the king himself was more inclined to
believe that he would be safe than that he would be destroyed, and, in
anxiety for him, refused to eat his food? And then do you dare to say to
Christians, "What have you to do with the kings of the world?" because
Daniel suffered persecution at a king's hands, and yet not look back upon
the same Daniel faithfully interpreting dreams to kings, calling a king
lord, receiving gifts and honors from a king? And so again do you dare, in
the case of the aforesaid three children, to excite the flames of odium
against kings, because, when they refused to worship the statue, they were
cast into the flames, while at the same time you hold your tongue, and say
nothing about their being thus extolled and honored by the king? Granted
that the king was a persecutor when he cast Daniel into the lions' den; but
when, on receiving him safely out again, in his joy and congratulations he
cast in his enemies to be torn in pieces and devoured by the same lions,
what was he then,--a persecutor, or not?(2) I call on you to answer me. For
if he was, why did not Daniel himself resist him, as he might so easily
have done in virtue of his great friendship for him, while yet you bid us
restrain kings from persecuting men? But if he was not a persecutor,
because he avenged with prompt justice the outrage committed against a holy
man, what kind of vengeance, I would ask, must be exacted from kings for
indignities offered to the sacraments of Christ, if the limbs of the
prophet required such a vengeance because they were exposed to danger?
Again, I acknowledge that the king, as indeed is manifest, was a persecutor
when he cast the three children into the furnace because they refused to
worship his image; but I ask whether he was still a persecutor when he set
forth the decree that all who should blaspheme against the one true God
should be destroyed, and their whole house laid waste? For if he was a
persecutor, why do you answer Amen to the words of a persecutor?(3) But if
he was not a persecutor, why do you call those persecutors who deter you
from the madness of blasphemy? For if they compel you to worship an idol,
then they are like the impious king, and you are like the three children;
but if they are preventing you from fighting against Christ, it is you who
are impious if you attempt to do this. But what they may be if they forbid
this with terrible threats, I do not presume to say. Do you find some other
name for them, if you will not call them pious emperors.
213. If I had been the person to bring forward these examples of Daniel
and the three children, you would perhaps resist, and declare that they
ought not to have been brought from those times in illustration of our
days; but God be thanked that you yourself brought them forward, to prove
the point, it is true, which you desired to establish, but you see that
their force was rather in favor of what you least would wish to prove.
Perhaps you will say that this proceeds from no deceit of yours, but from
the fallibility of human nature. Would that this were true! Amend it, then
You will not lose in reputation nay, it marks unquestionably the higher
mind to extinguish the fire of animosity by a frank confession, than merely
to escape the mist of falsehood by acuteness of the understanding.
CHAP. 94.--214. PETILIANUS said: "Where is the law of God? where is
your Christianity, if you not only commit murders and put men to death, but
also order such things to be done?"
215. AUGUSTIN answered: In reply to this, see what the fellow-heirs of
Christ say throughout the world. We neither commit murders, and put men to
death, nor order such things to be done; and you are raging much more madly
than those who do such things, in that you put such things into the minds
of men in opposition to the hopes of everlasting life.
CHAP. 95.--216. PETILIANUS said: "If you wish that we should be your
friends, why do you drag us to you against our will? But if you wish that
we should be your foes, why do you kill your foes?"
217. AUGUSTIN answered: We neither drag you to us against your will,
nor do we kill our foes; but whatever we do in our dealings with you,
though we may do it contrary to your inclination, yet we do it from our
love to you, that you may voluntarily correct yourselves, and live an
amended life. For no one lives against his will; and yet a boy, in order to
learn this lesson of his own free will,(1) is beaten contrary to his
inclination, and that often by the very man that is most dear to him. And
this, indeed, is what the kings would desire to say to you if they were to
strike you, for to this end their power has been ordained of God. But you
cry out even when they are not striking you.
CHAP. 96.--218. PETILIANUS said: "But what reason is there, or what
inconsistency of emptiness, in desiring communion with us so eagerly, when
all the time you call us by the false title of heretics?"
219. AUGUSTIN answered: If we so eagerly desired communion with
heretics, we should not be anxious that you should be converted from the
error of heresy; but when the very object of our negotiations with you is
that you should cease to be heretics, how are we eagerly desiring communion
with heretics? For, in fact, it is dissension and division that make you
heretics; but peace and unity make men Catholics. When, then, you come over
from your heresy to us, you cease to be what we hate, and begin to be what
we love.
CHAP. 97.--220. PETILIANUS said: "Choose, in short, which of the two
alternatives you prefer. If innocence is on your side, why do you persecute
us with the sword? Or if you call us guilty, why do you, who are yourselves
innocent, seek for our company?"
221. AUGUSTIN answered: O most ingenious dilemma, or rather most
foolish verbosity! Is it not usual for the choice of two alternatives to be
offered to an antagonist, when it is impossible that he should adopt both?
For if you should offer me the choice of the two propositions, that I
should say either that we were innocent, or that we were guilty; or, again,
of the other pair of propositions, viz., those concerning you, I could not
escape choosing either one or the other. But as it is, you offer me the
choice of these two, whether we are innocent or you are guilty, and wish me
to say which of these two I choose for my reply. But I refuse to make a
choice; for I assert them both, that we are innocent, and that you are
guilty. I say that we are innocent of the false and calumnious accusations
which you bring against us, so far as any of us, being in the Catholic
Church, can say with a safe conscience that we have neither given up the
sacred books, nor taken part in the worship of idols, nor murdered any man,
nor been guilty of any of the other crimes which you allege against us; and
that any who may have committed any such offenses, which, however, you have
not proved in any case, have thereby shut the doors of the kingdom of
heaven, not against us, but against themselves; "for every man shall bear
his own burden."(1) Here you have your answer on the first head. And I
further say that you are all guilty and accursed,--not some of you owing to
the sins of others, which are wrought among you by certain of your number,
and are censured by certain others, but all of you by the sin of schism;
from which most heinous sacrilege no one of you can say that he is free, so
long as he refuses to hold communion with the unity of all nations, unless,
indeed, he be compelled to say that Christ has told a lie concerning the
Church which is spread abroad among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.(2)
And so you have my second answer. See how I have made you two replies, of
which you were desirous that we should be reduced to choose the one. At any
rate, you should have taken notice that both assertions might be made by
us; and certainly, if this was what you wished, you should have asked it as
a favor of us that we should choose one or the other, when you saw that it
was in our power to choose both.
222. But "if innocence is on your side, why do you persecute us with
the sword?" Look back for a moment on your troops, which are not now armed
after the ancient fashion of their fathers only with cudgels, but have
further added to their equipment axes and lances and swords, and determine
for yourselves to which of us the question best belongs, "Why do you
persecute us with the sword?" "Or if you call us guilty," say you, "why do
you, who are yourselves innocent, seek for our company?" Here I answer very
briefly. The reason why you, being guilty, are sought after by the
innocent, is that you may cease to be guilty, and begin to be innocent.
Here then I have chosen both of the alternatives concerning us, and
answered beth of those concerning you, only do you in turn choose one of
the two. Are you innocent or guilty? Here you cannot choose to make the two
assertions, and yet choose both, if so it pleases you. For at any rate you
cannot be innocent in reference to the same circumstances in respect of
which you are guilty. If therefore you are innocent do not be surprised
that you are invited to be at peace with your brethren; but if you are
guilty, do not be surprised that you are sought for punishment by kings.
But since of these two alternatives you assume one for yourselves, and the
other is alleged of you by us,--for you assume to yourselves innocence and
it is alleged of you by us that you are living impiously,--hear again once
more what I shall say on either head. If you are innocent, why do you speak
against the testimony of Christ? But if you are guilty, why do you not fly
for refuge to His mercy? For His testimony, on the one hand, is to the
unity of the world, and His mercy, on the other, is in brotherly love.
CHAP. 98.--223. PETILIANUS said: "Lastly, as we have often said before,
how great is your presumption, that you should speak as you presume to do
of kings, when David says, 'It is better to trust in the Lord than to put
confidence in man: it is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence
in princes?'"(3)
224. AUGUSTIN answered: We put no confidence in man, but, so far as we
can, we warn men to place their trust in the Lord; nor do we put confidence
in princes, but, so far as we can, we warn princes to put confidence in the
Lord. And though we may seek aid from princes to promote the advantage of
the Church, yet do we not put confidence in them. For neither did the
apostle himself put confidence in that tribune, in the sense in which the
Psalmist talks of putting confidence in princes, from whom he obtained for
himself that an escort of armed men should be assigned to him; nor did he
put confidence in the armed men, by whose protection he escaped the snares
of the wicked ones, in any such sense as that of the Psalmist where he
speaks of putting confidence in men.(4) But neither do we find fault with
you yourselves, because you sought from the emperor that the basilicas
should be restored to you, as though you had put your trust in Julian the
prince; but we find fault with you, that you have despaired of the witness
of Christ, from whose unity you have separated the basilicas themselves.
For you received them at the bidding of an enemy of Christ, that in them
you should despise the commands of Christ, whilst you find force and truth
in what Julian ordained, saying, "This, moreover, on the petition of
Rogatianus, Pontius, Cassianus, and other bishops, not without an
intermixture of clergy, is added to complete the whole, that those
proceedings which were taken to their prejudice wrongly and without
authority being all annulled, everything should be restored to its former
position;" and yet you find nothing that has either force or truth in what
Christ ordained, saying, "Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem,
and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and even in the whole earth."(5) We
entreat you, let yourselves be reformed. Return to this most manifest unity
of the whole world; and let all things be restored to their former
position, not in accordance with the words of the apostate Julian, but in
accordance with the words of our Saviour Christ. Have pity on your own
soul. We are not now comparing Constantine and Julian in order to show how
different they are. We are not saying, If you have not placed confidence in
a man and in a prince, when you said to a pagan and apostate emperor, that
"in him justice only found a place," seeing that the party of Donatus has
universally employed the prayers and the rescript in which those words
occur, as is proved by the records of the audience; much less ought we to
be accused by you, as though we put our confidence in any man or prince, if
without any blasphemous flattery we obtained any request from Constantine
or from the other Christian emperors; or if they themselves, without our
asking for it, but remembering the account which they shall render to the
Lord, under whose words they tremble when they hear what you yourself have
quoted, "Be wise now therefore, O ye kings," etc., and many other sayings
of the sort, make any ordinance of their own accord in support of the unity
of the Catholic Church. But I say nothing about Constantine. It is Christ
and Julian that we contrast before you; nay, more than this, it is God and
man, the Son of God and the son of hell, the Saviour of our souls and the
destroyer of his own. Why do you maintain the rescript of Julian in the
occupation of the basilicas, and yet not maintain the gospel of Christ in
embracing the peace of the Church? We too cry out, "Let all things that
have been done amiss be restored to their ancient condition." The gospel of
Christ is of greater antiquity than the rescript of Julian; the unity of
Christ is of greater antiquity than the party of Donatus; the prayers of
the Church to the Lord on behalf of the unity of the Church are of greater
antiquity than the prayers of Rogatianus, and Pontius, and Cassianus, to
Julian on behalf of the party of Donatus. Are proceedings wrongly taken
when kings forbid division? and are they not wrongly taken when bishops
divide unity? Is" that wrong action when kings minister to the witness of
Christ in defence of the Church? and is it not wrong action when bishops
contradict the witness of Christ in order to deny the Church? We entreat
you, therefore, that the words of Julian himself, to whom you thus made
supplication, may be listened to, not in opposition to the gospel, but in
accordance with the gospel, and that "all things which have been done amiss
may be restored to their former condition."
CHAP. 99.--225. PETILIANUS said: "On you, yes you, you wretched men, I
call, who, being dismayed with the fear of persecution, whilst you seek to
save your riches, not your souls, love not so much the faithless faith of
the traitors, as the wickedness of the very men whose protection you have
won unto yourselves,--just in the same way as sailors, shipwrecked in the
waves, plunge into the waves by which they must be overwhelmed, and in the
great danger of their lives seek unmistakeably the very object of their
dread; just as the madness of a tyrant, that he may be free from
apprehension of any person whatsoever, desires to be feared, though this is
fraught with peril to himself: so, so you fly for refuge to the citadel of
wickedness, being willing to look on the loss or punishment of the innocent
if you may escape fear for yourselves. If you consider that you escape
danger when you plunge into ruin, truly also it is a faith that merits
condemnation to observe the faith of a robber. Lastly, it is trafficking in
a madman's gains to lose your own souls in order not to lose your wealth.
For the Lord Christ says, 'If a man shall gain the whole world, and lose
his own soul, what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?'"(1)
226. AUGUSTIN answered: That exhortation of yours would be useful, I
cannot but acknowledge, if any one were to employ it in a good cause. It is
undoubtedly well that you have tried to deter men from preferring their
riches to their souls. But I would have you, who have heard these words,
listen also for a time to us; for we also say this, but listen in what
sense. If kings threaten to take away your riches, because you are not Jews
according to the flesh, or because you do not worship idols or devils, or
because you are not carried about into any heresies, but abide in Catholic
unity, then choose rather that your riches should perish, that you perish
not yourselves; but be careful to prefer neither anything else, nor the
life of this world itself, to eternal salvation, which is in Christ. But if
kings threaten you with loss or condemnation, simply on the ground that you
are heretics, such things are terrifying you not in cruelty, but in mercy;
and your determination not to fear is a sign not of bravery, but of
obstinacy. Hear then the words of Peter, where he says, "What glory is it,
if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye take it patiently?"(2) so that
herein you have neither consolation upon earth, nor in the world to come
life everlasting; but you have here the miseries of the unfortunate, and
there the hell of heretics. Do you see, therefore, my brother, with whom I
am now arguing, that you ought first to show whether you hold the truth,
and then to exhort men that in upholding it they should be ready to give up
all the blessings which they possess in this present world? And so, when
you do not show this, because you cannot,--not that the talent is wanting,
but because the cause is bad,--why do you hasten by your exhortations to
make men both beggars and ignorant, both in want and wandering from the
truth, in rags and contentions, household drudges and heretics, both losing
their temporal goods in this world, and finding eternal evils in the
judgment of Christ? But the cautious son, who, while he stands in dread of
his father's rod, keeps away from the lair of the serpent, escapes both
blows and destruction; whereas he who despises the pains of discipline,
when set in rivalry with his own pernicious will, is both beaten and
destroyed. Do. you not now understand, O learned man, that he who has
resigned all earthly goods in order to maintain the peace of Christ,
possesses God; whereas he who has lost even a very few coins in behalf of
the party of Donatus is devoid of heart?
CHAP. 100.--227. PETILIANUS said: "But we who are poor in spirit(1) are
not apprehensive for our wealth, but rather feel a dread of wealth. We, 'as
having nothing, and yet possessing all things,'(2) look on our soul as our
wealth, and by our punishments and blood purchase to ourselves the
everlasting riches of heaven. So again the same Lord says, 'Whosoever shall
lose his substance, shall find it again an hundred fold.'"
228. AUGUSTIN answered: It is not beside the purpose to inquire into
the true meaning of this passage also. For where my purpose is not
interfered with by any mistake which you make, or any false impression
which you convey in quoting from the Scriptures, I do not concern myself
about the matter. It is not then written, "Whosoever shall lose his
substance," but "Whosoever shall lose his life for my sake."(3) And the
passage about substance is not, "Whosoever shall lose," but "Every one that
hath forsaken;"(4) and that not only with reference to substance of money,
but many other things besides. But you meanwhile have not lost your
substance; but whether you have forsaken it, in that you so boast of
poverty, I cannot say. And if by any chance my colleague Fortunatus may
know this, being in the same city with you, he never told me, because I had
never asked him. However, even if you had done this, you have yet yourself
quoted the testimony of the apostle against yourself in this very epistle
which you have written: "Though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and
though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth. me
nothing."(5) For if you had charity, you would not bring charges against
the whole world, which knows nothing of you, and of which you know no
more,--no, not even such charges as are rounded on the proved offenses of
the Africans. If you had charity, you would not picture to yourself a false
unity in your calumnies, but you would learn to recognize the unity that is
most clearly set forth in the words of the Lord: "even in the whole
earth."(6) But if you did not do this, why do you boast as though you had
done it? Are you really so filled with fear of riches, that, having
nothing, you possess all things? Tell that to your colleague Crispinus, who
lately bought a farm near our city of Hippo, that he might there plunge men
into the lowest abyss.(7) Whence I too know this all too well. You perhaps
are not aware of it, and therefore shout out in security, "We stand in fear
of riches." And hence I am surprised that that cry of yours has been
allowed to pass Crispinus, so as to reach us. For between Constantina,
where you are, and Hippo, where I am, lies Calama, where he is, nearer
indeed to our side, but still between us. I wonder, therefore, how it was
that he did not first intercept this cry, and strike it back so that it
should not reach to our ears; and that he did not, in opposition to you,
recite in much more copious phrase a eulogy on riches. For he not only
stands in no fear of riches, but he actually loves them. And certainly,
before you utter anything about the rest, you should rehearse such views to
him. If he makes no corrections, then we have our answer ready. But for
yourself, if it be true that you are poor, you have with you my brother
Fortunatus. You will be more likely with such sentiments to please him, who
is my colleague, than Crispinus, who is your own.
CHAP. 101.--229. PETILIANUS said: "Inasmuch as we live in the fear of
God, we have no fear of the punishments and executions which you wreak with
the sword; but the only thing which we avoid is that by your most wicked
communion you destroy men's souls, according to the saying of the Lord
Himself: 'Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the
soul; but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in
hell.'"(1)
230. AUGUSTIN answered: You do the destruction which you speak of, not
with a visible sword, but with that of which it is said, "The sons of men,
whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword."(2) For
with this sword of accusation and calumny against the world of which you
are wholly ignorant, you destroy the souls of those who lack experience.
But if you find fault with a most wicked communion, as you term it, I would
bid you presently, not with my words, but with your own, to ascend,
descend, enter, turn yourself about, change sides, be such as was Optatus.
But if you return to your senses, and shall find that you are not such as
he, not because he refused to partake of the sacraments with you, but
because you took offense at what he did, then you will acquit the world of
crimes which do not belong to it, and you will find yourself involved in
the sin of schism.
CHAP. 102.--231. PETILIANUS said: "You, therefore, who prefer rather to
be washed with the most false of baptisms than to be regenerate, not only
do not lay aside your sins, but also load your souls with the offenses of
criminals. For as the water of the guilty has been abandoned by the Holy
Spirit, so it is clearly filled full of the offenses of the traditors. To
any wretched man, then, who is baptized by one of this sort, we would say,
If you have wished to be free from falsehood, you are really drenched with
falsity. If you desired to shut out the sins of the flesh, you will, as the
conscience of the guilty comes upon you, be partakers likewise of their
guilt. If you wished to extinguish the flames of avarice, you are drenched
with deceit, you are drenched with wickedness, you are drenched also with
madness. Lastly, if you believe that faith is identical in the giver and
the receiver, you are drenched with the blood of a brother by him who slays
a man. And so it comes to pass that you, who had come to baptism free from
sin, return from baptism guilty of the sin of murder."
232. AUGUSTIN answered: I should like to come to argument with those
who shouted assent when they either heard or read those words of yours. For
such men have not ears in their hearts, but their heart in their ears. Yet
let them read again and again, and consider, and find out for themselves,
not what the sound of those words is, but what they mean. First of all, to
sift the meaning of the last clause, "So it comes to pass," you say, "that
you who had come to baptism free from sin, return from baptism guilty of
the sin of murder:" tell me, to begin with, who there is i that comes to
baptism free from sin, with the single exception of Him who came to be
baptized, not that His iniquity should be purged away, but that an example
of humility might be given us? For what shall be forgiven to one free from
sin? Or are you indeed endowed with such an eloquence, that you can show to
us some innocence which yet committeth sin? Do you not hear the words of
Scripture saying, "No one is clean from sin in Thy sight, not even the
infant whose life is but of a single day upon the earth?"(3) For whence
else is it that one hastens even with infants to seek remission of their
sins? Do you not hear the words of another Scripture, "In sin did my mother
conceive me?"(4) In the next place, if a man returns a murderer, who had
come without the guilt of murder, merely because he receives baptism at a
murderer's hands, then all they who returned from receiving baptism at the
hands of Optatus were made partakers with Optatus. Go now, and see with
what face you cast in our teeth that we excite the wrath of kings against
you. Are you not afraid that as many satellites of Gildo will be sought for
among you, as there are men who may have been baptized by Optatus? Do you
see at length how that sentence of yours, like an empty bladder, has
rattled not only with a meaningless sound, but on your own head?
233. To go on to the other earlier arguments which you have set before
us to be refuted, they are of such a nature that we must needs allow that
every one returns from baptism endued with the character of him by whom he
is baptized; but God forbid that those whom you baptize should return from
you infected with the same madness as possesses you when you make such a
statement! And what a dainty sound there was in your words, "You are
drenched with deceit, you are drenched with wickedness, you are drenched
also with madness!" Surely you would never pour forth words like this
unless you were, not drenched, but filled even to repletion with madness.
Is it then true, to say nothing of the rest, that all who come untainted
with covetousness to receive baptism at the hands of your covetous
colleagues, or the priests of your party, return guilty of covetousness,
and that those who run in soberness to the whirlpool of intoxication to be
baptized return in drunkenness? If you entertain and teach such views as
this, you will have the effrontery even to quote, as making against us, the
passage which you advanced some little time ago: "It is better to trust in
the Lord than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the Lord
than to put confidence in princes."(1) What is the meaning of your
teaching, I would ask, save only this, that we should put our confidence
not in the Lord, but in man, when you say that the baptized person is made
to resemble him who has baptized him? And since you assume this as the
fundamental principle of your baptism, are men to place their trust in you?
and are those to place their trust in princes who were disposed to place it
in the Lord? Truly I would bid them hearken not to you, but rather to those
proofs which you have urged against ourselves, ay, and to words more awful
yet; for not only is it written, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to
put confidence in man," but also, "Cursed be the man that trusteth in
man."(2)
CHAP. 103.--234. PETILIANUS said: "Imitate indeed the prophets, who
feared to have their holy souls deceived with false baptism. For Jeremiah
says of old that among impious men water is as one that lies. 'Water,' he
says, 'that lies has not faith.'"
235. AUGUSTIN answered: Any one that hears these words, without being
acquainted with the Scriptures, and who does not believe that you are
either so far astray as not to know what you are saying, or deceiving in
such wise that he whom you have deceived should not know what he says,
would believe that the prophet Jeremiah, wishing to be baptized, had taken
precautions not to be baptized by impious men, and had used these words
with this intent. For what was your object in saying, previous to your
quotation of this passage, "Imitate indeed the prophets, who feared to have
their holy souls deceived with false baptism?" Just as though, in the days
of Jeremiah, any one were washed with the sacrament of baptism, except so
far as the Pharisees almost every moment bathed themselves, and their
couches and cups and platters, with the washings which the Lord condemned,
as we read in the gospel.(3) How then could Jeremiah have said this, as
though he desired to be baptized, and sought to avoid being baptized by
impious men? He said it, then, when he was complaining of a faithless
people, by the corruption of whose morals he was vexed, not wishing to
associate with their deeds; and yet he did not separate himself bodily from
their congregation, nor seek other sacraments than those which the people
received as suitable to that time, according to the law of Moses. To this
people, therefore, in their evil mode of life, he gave the name of "a
wound," with which the heart of the righteous man was grievously smitten,
whether speaking thus of himself, or fore-shadowing in himself what he
foresaw would come to pass. For he speaks as follows: "O Lord, remember me,
and visit me; make clear my innocence before those who persecute me in no
spirit of long-suffering: know that for Thy sake I have suffered rebuke
from those that scorn Thy words. Make their portion complete; and Thy word
shall be unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by
Thy name, O Lord God of hoists. I sat not in the assembly of the mockers,
but was afraid of the presence of Thy hand; I sat alone, because I was
filled with bitterness. Why do those who make me sad prevail against me? My
wound is grievous; whence shall I be healed? It is become unto me as lying
water, that has no faith."(4) In all this it is manifest what the prophet
wished to be understood, but manifest only to those who do not wish to
distort to their own perverse cause the meaning of what they read. For
Jeremiah says that his wound has become unto him as lying water, which
cannot inspire faith; but he wished that by his wound those should be
understood who made him sad by the evil conduct of their lives. Whence also
the apostle says, "Without were fightings, within were fears;"(5) and
again, "Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn
not?"(6) And because he had no hopes that they could be reformed, therefore
he said, "Whence shall I be healed?" as though his own pain must needs
continue so long as those among whom he was compelled to live continued
what they were. But that a people is commonly understood under the
appellation of water is shown in the Apocalypse, where we understand "many
waters" to mean "many peoples," not by any conjecture of our own, but by an
express explanation in the place itself.(7) Abstain then from blaspheming
the sacrament of baptism from any misunderstanding, or rather error, even
when found in a man of most abandoned character; for not even in the lying
Simon was the baptism which he received a lying water,(8) nor do all the
liars of your party administer a lying water when they baptize in the name
of the Trinity. For neither do they begin to be liars only when they are
betrayed and convicted, and so forced to acknowledge their misdeeds; but
rather they were already liars, when, being adulterers and accursed, they
pretended to be chaste and innocent.
CHAP. 104.--236. PETILIANUS said: "David also said, 'The oil of the
sinner shall not anoint my head.' Who is it, therefore, that he calls a
sinner? Is it I who suffer your violence, or you who persecute the
innocent?"
237. AUGUSTIN answered: As representing the body of Christ, which is
the Church of the living God, the pillar and mainstay of the truth,
dispersed throughout the world, on account of the gospel which was
preached, according to the words of the apostle, "to every creature which
is under heaven:"(1) as representing the whole world, of which David, whose
words you cannot understand, has said, "The world also is stablished, that
it cannot be moved;"(2) whereas you contend that it not only has been
moved, but has been utterly destroyed: as representing this, I answer, I do
not persecute the innocent. But David said, "The oil of the sinner," not of
the traditor; not of him who offers incense, not of the persecutor, but "of
the sinner." What then will you make of your interpretation? See first
whether you are not yourself a sinner. It is nothing to the point if you
should say, I am not a traditor, I am not an offerer of incense, I am not a
persecutor. I myself, by the grace of God, am none of these, nor is the
world, which cannot be moved. But say, if you dare, I am not a sinner. For
David says, "The oil of the sinner." For so long as any sin, however light,
be found in you, what ground have you for maintaining that you are not
concerned in the expression that is used, "The oil of the sinner"? For I
would ask whether you use the Lord's prayer in your devotions? For if you
do not use that prayer, which our Lord taught His disciples for their use,
where have you learned another, proportioned to your merits, as exceeding
the merits of the apostles? But if you pray, as our great Master deigned to
teach us, how do you say, "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them
that trespass against us?" For in this petition we are not referring to
those sins which have already been forgiven us in baptism. Therefore these
words in the prayer either exclude you from being a petitioner to God, or
else they make it manifest that you too are a sinner. Let those then come
and kiss your head who have been baptized by you, whose heads have perished
through your oil. But see to yourself, both what you are and what you think
about yourself. Is it really true that Optatus, whom pagans, Jews,
Christians, men of our party, men of your party, all proclaim throughout
the whole of Africa to have been a thief, a traitor, an oppressor, a
contriver of schism; not a friends not a client, but a tool of him(3) whom
one of your party declared to have been his count, companion, and god,-is
it true that he was not a sinner in any conceivable interpretation of the
term? What then will they do whose heads were anointed by one guilty of a
capital offense? Do not those very men kiss your heads, on whose heads you
pass so serious a judgment by this interpretation which you place upon the
passage? Truly I would bid you bring them forth, and admonish them to heal
themselves. Or is it rather your heads which should be healed, who run so
grievously astray? What then, you will ask, did David really say: Why do
you ask me: rather ask himself. He answers you in the verse above: "The
right-eons shall smite me in kindness, and shall reprove me; but let not
the oil of the sinner anoint my head."(4) What could be plainer? what more
manifest? I had rather, he says, be healed by a rebuke administered in
kindness, than be deceived and led astray by smooth flattery, coming on me
as an ointment on my head. The self-same sentiment is found elsewhere in
Scripture under other words: "Better are the wounds of a friend than the
proffered kisses of an enemy."(5)
CHAP. 105.--238. PETILIANUS said: "But he thus praises the ointment of
concord among brethren: 'Behold how good and how pleasant it is for
brethren to dwell together in unity! It is like the precious ointment upon
the head, that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard; that went down
to the skirts of his garments; as the dew of Hermon, and as the dew that
descended upon the mountains of Zion: for there the Lord commanded the
blessing, even life for evermore.'(6) Thus, he says, is unity anointed,
even as the priests are anointed."
239. AUGUSTIN answered: What you say is true. For that priesthood in
the body of Christ had an anointing, and its salvation is secured by the
bond of unity. For indeed Christ Himself derives His name from chrism, that
is, from anointing. Him the Hebrews call the Messiah, which word is closely
akin to the Phoenician language, as is the case with very many other Hebrew
words, if not with almost all.(1) What then is meant by the head in that
priesthood, what by the beard, what by the skirts of the garments? So far
as the Lord enables me to understand, the head is none other than the
Saviour of the body, of whom the apostle says, "And He is the head of the
body, the Church."(2) By the beard is not unsuitably understood fortitude.
Therefore, on those who show themselves to be brave in His Church, and
cling to the light of His countenance, to preach the truth without fear,
there descends from Christ Himself, as from the head, a sacred ointment,
that is to say, the sanctification of the Spirit. By the skirts of the
garments we are here given to understand that which is at the top of the
garments, through which the head of Him who gives the clothing enters. By
this are signified those who are perfected in faith within the Church. For
in the skirts is perfection. And I presume you must remember what was said
to a certain rich man: "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou
hast, and give to the poor, and thou shall have treasure in heaven; and
come and follow me."(3) He indeed went away sorrowful, slighting what was
perfect, choosing what was imperfect. But does it follow that there were
wanting those who were so made perfect by such a surrender of earthly
things, that the ointment of unity descended upon them, as from the head
upon the skirts of the garments? For, putting aside the apostles, and those
who were immediately associated with those leaders and teachers of the
Church, whom we understand to be represented with greater dignity and more
conspicuous fortitude in the beard, read in the Acts of the Apostles, and
see those who "brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid
them down at the apostles' feet. Neither said any of them that aught of the
things which he possessed was his own: but they had all things common: and
distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. And the
multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul."(4) I
doubt not that you are aware that it is so written. Recognize, therefore,
how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity.
Recognize the beard of Aaron; recognize the skirts of the spiritual
garments. Search the Scriptures themselves, and see where those things
began to be done; you will find that it was in Jerusalem. From this skirt
of the garment is woven together the whole fabric of unity throughout all
nations. By this the Head entered into the garment, that Christ should be
clothed with all the variety of the several nations of the earth, because
in this skirt of the garment appeared the actual variety of tongues. Why,
therefore, is the Head itself, whence that ointment of unity descended,
that is, the spiritual fragrance of brotherly love,--why, I say, is the
Head itself exposed to your resistance, while it testifies and declares
that "repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among
all nations, beginning at Jerusalem"?(5) And by this ointment you wish the
sacrament of chrism to be understood, which is indeed holy as among the
class of visible signs, like baptism itself, but yet can exist even among
the worst of men, wasting their life in the works of the flesh, and never
destined to possess the kingdom of heaven, and having therefore nothing to
do either with the beard of Aaron, or with the skirts of his garments, or
with any fabric of priestly clothing. For where do you intend to place what
the apostle enumerates as "the manifest works of the flesh, which," he
says, "are these: fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry,
poisonings, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, heresies,
envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you
before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such
things shall not inherit the kingdom of God?"(6) I put aside fornications,
which are committed in secret; interpret uncleanness as you please, I am
willing to put it aside as well. Let us put on one side also poisons, since
no one is openly a compounder or giver of poisons. I put aside also
heresies, since you will have it so. I am in doubt whether I ought to put
aside idolatry, since the apostle classes with it covetousness, which is
openly rife among you. However, setting aside all these, are there none
among you lascivious, none covetous, none open in their indulgence of
enmities, none fond of strife, or fond of emulation, wrathful, given to
seditions, envious, drunken, wasting their time in revellings? Are none of
such a character anointed among you? Do none die well known among you to be
given to such things, or openly indulging in them? If you say there are
none, I would have you consider whether you do not come under the
description yourself, since you are manifestly telling lies in the desire
for strife. But if you are yourself severed from men of this sort, not by
bodily separation, but by dissimilarity of life, and if you behold with
lamentation crowds like these around your altars, what shall we say, since
they are anointed with holy oil, and yet, as the apostle assures us with
the clearness of truth, shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Must we do
such impious despite to the beard of Aaron and to the skirts of his
garments, as to suppose that they are to be placed there? Far be that from
us. Separate therefore the visible holy sacrament, which can exist both in
the good and in the bad,--in the former for their reward, in the latter for
judgment; separate it from the invisible unction of charity, which is the
peculiar property of the good. Separate them, separate them, ay, and may
God separate you from the party of Donatus, and call you back again into
the Catholic Church, whence you were torn by them while yet a catechumen,
to be bound by them in the bond of a deadly distinction. Now are ye not in
the mountains of Zion, the dew of Hermon on the mountains of Zion, in
whatever sense that be received by you; for you are not in the city upon a
hill, which has this as its sure sign, that it cannot be hid. It is known
therefore unto all nations. But the party of Donatus is unknown to the
majority of nations, therefore is it not the true city.
CHAP. 106.--240, PETILIANUS said: "Woe unto you, therefore, who, by
doing violence to what is holy, cut away the bond of unity; whereas the
prophet says, 'If the people shall sin, the priest shall pray for them: but
if the priest shall sin, who will pray for him?'"
241. AUGUSTIN answered: I seemed too a little while ago, when we were
disputing about the oil of the sinner, to anoint your forehead, in order
that you might say, if you dared, whether you yourself were not a sinner.
You have had the hardihood to say as much. What a portentous sin! For in
that you assert yourself to be a priest, what else have you maintained by
quoting this testimony of the prophet, save that you are wholly without
sin? For if you have sin, who is there that shall pray for you, according
to your understanding of the words? For thus you blazon yourselves among
the wretched people, quoting from the prophet: "If the people shall sin,
the priest shall pray for them: but if the priest shall sin, who will pray
for him?(1) to the intent that they may believe you to be without sin, and
entrust the wiping away their sins to your prayers. Truly ye are great men,
exalted above your fellows, heavenly, godlike, angels indeed rather than
men, who pray for the people, and will not have the people pray for you!
Are you more righteous than Paul, more perfect than that great apostle, who
was wont to commend himself to the prayers of those whom he taught?
"Continue," he says, "in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving;
withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of
utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds;
that I may make it manifest, as I ought to speak."(2) See how prayer is
made for an apostle, which you would have not made for a bishop. Do you
perceive of how devilish a nature your pride is? Prayer is made for an
apostle, that he may make manifest the mystery of Christ as he ought to
speak. Accordingly, if you had a pious people under you, you ought to have
exhorted them to pray for you, that you might not give utterance as you
ought not. Are you more righteous than the evangelist John, who says, "If
we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in
us?"(3) Finally, are you more righteous than Daniel, whom you yourself
quoted in this very epistle, going so far as to say, "The most righteous
king cast forth Daniel, as he supposed, to be devoured by wild beasts?"--a
thing which he never did suppose, since he said to Daniel himself, in the
most friendly spirit, as the context of the lesson shows, "Thy God, whom
thou servest continually, He will deliver thee."(4) But on this subject we
have already said much. With regard to the question now before us, viz.,
that Daniel was most righteous, it is proved not by your testimony, though
that might be sufficient for me in the argument which I hold with you, but
by the testimony of the Spirit of God, speaking also by the mouth of
Ezekiel, where he named three men of most eminent righteousness, Noah,
Daniel, and Job, who, he said, were the only men that could be saved from a
certain excessive wrath of God, which was hanging over all the rest.(5) A
man, therefore, of the highest righteousness, one of three conspicuous for
righteousness, prays, and says, "While I was speaking, and praying, and
confessing my sin, and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my
supplication before the Lord my God."(6) And you say that you are without
sin, because forsooth you are a priest; and if the people sin, you pray for
them: but if you sin, who shall pray for you? For clearly by the impiety of
such arrogance you show yourself to be unworthy of the mediation of that
Priest whom the prophet would have to be understood in these words, which
you do not understand. For now that no one may ask why this was said, I
will explain it so far as by God's grace I shall be able. God was preparing
the minds of men, by His prophet, to desire a Priest of such a sort that
none should pray for Him. He was Himself prefigured in the times of the
first people and the first temple, in which all things were figures for our
ensample. Therefore the high priest used to enter alone into the holy of
holies, that he might make supplication for the people, which did not enter
with the priest into that inner sanctuary;(1) just as our High Priest is
entered into the secret places of the heavens, into that truer holy of
holies, whilst we for whom He prays are still placed here.(1) It is with
this reference that the prophet says, "If the people shall sin, the priest
shall pray for them: but if the priest shall sin, who will pray for him?"
Seek therefore a priest of such a kind that he cannot sin, nor need that
one should pray for him. And for this reason prayer is made for the
apostles by the people;(2) but for that Priest who is the Master and Lord
of the apostles is prayer not made. Hear John confessing this, and saying,
"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if
any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the
righteous, and He is the propitiation for our sins."(3) "We have," he says;
and "for our sins." I pray you, learn humility, that you may not fall, or
rather, that in time you may arise again. For had you not already fallen,
you never would have used such words.
CHAP. 107.--242. PETILIANUS said: "And that none who is a layman may
claim to be free from sin, they are all bound by this prohibition: 'Be not
partakers of other men's sins.'"
243. AUGUSTIN answered: You are mistaken toto caelo, as the saying is,
by reason of your pride, whilst, by reason of your humility, you are
unwilling to communicate with the whole world. For, in the first place,
this was not spoken to a layman; and, in the second place, you are wholly
ignorant in what sense it was spoken. The apostle, writing to Timothy,
gives this warning to none other than Timothy himself, to whom he says in
another place, "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee
by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."(4) And by
many other proofs it is made clear that he was not a layman. But in that he
says, "Be not partaker of other men's sins,"(5) he means, Be not partaker
voluntarily, or with consent. And hence he immediately subjoins directions
how he shall obey the injunction, saying, "Keep thyself pure." For neither
was Paul himself partaker of other men's sins, because he endured false
brethren, over whom he groans, in bodily unity; nor did the apostles who
preceded him partake of the thievery and crime of Judas, because they
partook of the holy supper with him when he had already sold his Lord, and
been pointed out as the traitor by that Lord.
CHAP. 108.--244. PETILIANUS said: "By this sentence, again, the apostle
places in the same category those who have fellowship in the consciousness
of evil. 'Worthy of death,' he says, 'are both those who do such things,
and those who consent with those that do them.'"6
245. AUGUSTIN answered: I care not in what manner you have use these
words, they are true. And this is the substance of the teaching of the
Catholic Church, that there is a great difference between those who consent
because they take pleasure in such things, and those who tolerate while
they dislike them. The former make themselves chaff, while they follow the
barrenness of the chaff; the latter are the grain. Let them wait for
Christ, who bears the winnowing-fan, that they may be separated from the
chaff.
CHAP. 109.--246. PETILIANUS said: "Come therefore to the Church, all ye
people, and flee the company of traditors, if you would not also perish
with them. For that you may the more readily know that, while they are
themselves guilty, they yet entertain an excellent opinion of our faith,
let me inform you that I baptize their polluted ones; they, though may God
never grant them such an opportunity, receive those who are made mine by
baptism,--which certainly they would not do if they recognized any defects
in our baptism. See therefore how holy that is which we give, when even our
sacrilegious enemy fears to destroy it."
247. AUGUSTIN answered: Against this error I have said much already,
both in this work and elsewhere. But since you think that in this sentence
you have so strong a confirmation of your vain opinions, that you deemed it
right to end your epistle with these words, that they might remain as it
were the fresher in the minds of your readers, I think it well to make a
short reply. We recognize in heretics that baptism, which belongs not to
the heretics but to Christ, in such sort as in fornicators, in unclean
persons or effeminate, in idolaters, in poisoners, in those who retain
enmity, in those who are fond of contention, in the credulous, in the
proud, given to seditions, in the envious, in drunkards, in revellers; and
in men like these we hold valid the baptism which is not theirs but
Christ's. For of men like these, and among them are included heretics also,
none, as the apostle says, shall inherit the kingdom of heaven.(1) Nor are
they to be considered as being in the body of Christ, which is the Church,
simply because they are materially partakers of the sacraments. For the
sacraments indeed are holy, even in such men as these, and shall be of
force in them to greater condemnation, because they handle and partake of
them unworthily. But the men themselves are not within the constitution of
the Church, which increases in the increase of God in its members through
connection and contact with Christ. For that Church is founded on a rock,
as the Lord says, "Upon this rock I will build my Church."(2) But they
build on the sand, as the same Lord says, "Every one that heareth these
sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man,
which built his house upon the sand."(3) But that you may not suppose that
the Church which is upon a rock is in one part only of the earth, and does
not extend even to its furthest boundaries, hear her voice groaning from
the psalm, amid the evils of her pilgrimage. For she says, "From the end of
the earth have I cried unto Thee; when my heart was distressed Thou didst
lift me up upon the rock; Thou hast led me, Thou, my hope, hast become a
tower of courage from the face of the enemy."(4) See how she cries from the
end of the earth. She is not therefore in Africa alone, nor only among the
Africans, who send a bishop from Africa to, Rome to a few Montenses,(5) and
into Spain to the house of one lady.(6) See how she is exalted on a rock.
All, therefore, are not to be deemed to be in her which build upon the
sand, that is, which hear the words of Christ and do them not, even though
both among us and among you they have and transmit the sacrament of
baptism. See how her hope is in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost,--not in Peter or in Paul, still less in Donatus or Petilianus. What
we fear, therefore, to destroy, is not yours, but Christ's; and it is holy
of itself, even in sacrilegious hands. For we cannot receive those who come
from you, unless we destroy in them whatsoever appertains to you. For we
destroy the treachery of the deserter, not the stamp of the sovereign.
Accordingly, do you yourself consider and annul what you said: "I," say
you, "baptize their polluted ones; they, though may God never grant them
such an opportunity, receive those who are made mine by baptism." For you
do not baptize men who are infected, but you rebaptize them, so as to
infect them with the fraud of your error. But we do not receive men who are
made yours by baptism; but we destroy that error of yours whereby they are
made yours, and we receive the baptism of Christ, by which they are
baptized. Therefore it is not without significance that you introduce the
words, "Though may God never grant them such an opportunity." For you said,
"They, though may God never grant them such an opportunity, receive those
who are made mine by baptism." For while you in your fear that we may
receive your followers desire to be understood, "may God never give them
the opportunity of receiving such as are mine," I suppose that, without
knowing what it meant, you said, "May God never make them mine that you
should receive them." For we pray that those may not be really yours who
come over at the present moment to the Catholic Church. Nor do they come
over so as to be ours by right of baptism, but by fellowship with us, and
that with us they may belong to Christ, in virtue of their baptism.
Taken from "The Early Church Fathers and Other Works" originally published
by Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. in English in Edinburgh, Scotland, beginning in
1867. (LNPF I/IV, Schaff). The digital version is by The Electronic Bible
Society, P.O. Box 701356, Dallas, TX 75370, 214-407-WORD.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.
Copyright (c) Eternal Word Television Network 1996.
Provided courtesy of:
EWTN On-Line Services
PO Box 3610
Manassas, VA 20108
Voice: 703-791-2576
Fax: 703-791-4250
Data: 703-791-4336
FTP: ftp.ewtn.com
Telnet: ewtn.com
WWW: http://www.ewtn.com.
Email address: sysop@ewtn.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------